Someone recorded and posted this hilarious parody of the homosexual Episcopalian Bishop Gene Robinson.
Author: Pete Vere
Death of Canadian Democracy
Okay, the next sentence is gonna be a little cumbersome and involve heavy name dropping…. A recent piece on homosexual marriage, the suppression of civil liberties and the death of Canadian democracy written by John Pacheco of Catholic-Legate.com and I for a fall issue of Culture Wars is now available on-line at the Sierra Times. Here’s a sample:
“On June 15th, 2001, the Saskatchewan Human Rights Board of Inquiry fined Hugh Owens, an evangelical Protestant, and the Saskatoon Star Phoenix $1500 for violating the equality rights of three gay men. Mr. Owens crime? He expressed his opinion on gay and lesbians sex through an advertisement in the Saskatoon Star Phoenix. This advertisement consisted of a pictograph of two men holding hands superimposed with a circle and slash- the symbol of something forbidden-and a list of Bible verses condemning the practice of homosexuality. While Mr. Owens is currently appealing this ruling, if he loses and still refuses to comply with the Board of Inquiry, he will potentially find himself charged with contempt of court. If convicted, he will likely find himself consigned to jail as the first prisoner of conscience in the war between sexual plurism and religious plurism.”
Read the whole piece here
Vulgarity for Jesus!
According to the Sierra Times, the Dems have taken their vulgarity to a new low by spouting it off in a Lutheran church. This raises an interesting question, namely, will the 2004 presidential campaign require parental ratings?
Allah Keep Our Land Glorious and Free?
Although my Canadian readership will recognize the above title as a play on our national anthem, I am having second thoughts about moving back to Canada. Not too long ago, Mark Steyn a fellow Canuck penned an excellent editorial in the Telegraph. It concerned the Islamification of Europe. As Mr. Steyn wrote, To those of us watching from afar the ructions over the European constitution – a 1970s solution to a 1940s problem – it seems amazing that no Continental politician is willing to get to grips with the real crisis facing Europe in the 21st century: the lack of Europeans.
As many other commentators within the culture war have noted, the low reproduction rate among native Europeans coupled with increased Muslim immigration are quickly transforming Europe into another Islamic continent. Yet the European secularists refuse to face this problem. Having spent the past thirty years suppressing the consequences of biological coupling, the modern European remains clueless as to the consequences of demographic coupling.
Unfortunately, recent Canadian statistics and demographics demonstrate a similar trend. Thus Mr. Steyns observations could easily included our native land. A recent statistic quoted by the Canadian Society of Muslims on its website estimates Canadas Islamic population at around 650,000. Over the past decade alone, this represents a growth from under one percent of Canadas total population to well over two percent.
At first two-to-three percent of the population seems statistically negligible. Granted, the Muslim population more than doubled over the past ten years, but it still represents a small minority of Canadians. Yet factor Canada’s declining reproduction rate as well as its liberal immigration policy into the equation. As an aside concerning the latter, in the aftermath of its 9-11 coverage, even Canadas putatively conservative Globe & Mail questioned our governments liberal immigration policy. The Canadian Security Intelligence Service, which is Canadas closest equivalent to the CIA, had reportedly warned Canadian politicians that our loose immigration policy made us an attractive staging ground from which terrorists could easily attack American targets.
But returning to the subject at hand, Canada’s Muslim population is much younger than our general population. Additionally, they enjoy a stronger reproduction rate. Has Pierre Trudeau removed the state from the nation’s bedroom likely located somewhere in the Burnaby-Douglas riding only to see it replaced by the Sharia?
Speaking of which, one of my Envoy Encore recently emailed me a story published by Aljazeera. It detailed Muslim efforts to establish an Islamic tribunal in Canada. “Since arbitrators’ rulings can be enforced by the courts,” we read, “the development has raised eyebrows that Sharia will in effect be endorsed by Canada’s secular courts.” The story dismisses any negative reaction to this development as overblown . It then equivocates the proposed Islamic tribunal with various Rabbinical courts already enjoying limited legal recognition under Canadian law.
Setting aside the Sharia’s peculiarities for a moment and like Kathy Shaidle, a fellow Canadian Catholic author, I find myself among the some of us [who] think stoning rape victims is a bit peculiar there are other reasons to remain skeptical about this comparison between Islamic tribunals and Rabbinical courts. Does modern Judaism regularly attack civilian targets among the Gentiles? Does Isreal sponsor terrorist activities on western soil? Islam is alone among the five major world religions in employing forced conversion as a legitimate means of evangelization.
Actually, I take that back. Secularism, which is Canada’s new state religion, also imposes forced conversion. Just look at poor Mark Harding. Mr. Harding is a Christian who recently ran afoul of Canada’s hate police for drawing attention to certain peculiarities within the Islamic world. As Doug Coup reports in the Christian Times:
[Harding’s] offending pamphlets discussed Islamic societies around the world where Muslims are torturing, maiming, starving and killing Christians simply because of their faith. Harding argues that Islam is full of hate and violence, and that its holy books teach that it will always be at war with other religions. Once a state becomes an Islamic state, no other religion is tolerated, he says.
His outspokenness last June landed Harding in trouble with the Muslim community, and he is going to trial next month to face criminal charges on three counts of incitement to hatred. Complaints were also lodged with the Canadian Human Rights Commission. He was arrested and spent a few days in jail before a hearing last summer.
Canadians political and religious commentators need not find Mr. Hardings situation surprising. After all, the Canadian Human Rights Commission is the same quasi-judicial body that silenced as hate literature certain biblical passages pertaining to homosexuality. It is not too much of a stretch to silence international headlines as well. And thus I am reminded of Mark Steyns response to a similar flap over Johnny Harts recent allegedly anti-Islamic cartoon:
Although I agreed of course that Islamophobic cartooning was the most pressing issue of the week, in my usual shallow way I’d become distracted by some of the day’s more trivial stories – the 11 Hindus burnt alive by a Muslim gang in Bangladesh, the 13 Christian churches torched by Muslim rioters in the Nigerian town of Kazaure, and the 27 Turks and Britons murdered by Muslim terrorists in Istanbul. No dead Jews in that particular day’s headlines, but otherwise a good haul of Hindus, Christians and, of course, Muslims…
Like Mr. Steyn, I too cannot help but these headlines distracting. They may be as trivial as the First Amendment that protects my expression of concern over their content from the Canadian Human Rights Commission, but nevertheless I find them distracting.
Of a similar trivial nature is my concern over Canadas apparent elimination of free speech from our public discourse. Criticism of another culture can be branded hate speech unless the critiqued culture is distinctly Christian or American. Yet if civil liberties in the Middle East are an example of what we can expect in Canadas tolerant and multi-cultural society, the culture of death propagated by our secularists will eventually give way to the Islamospheres culture of fear.
Anticipating Howard Dean
Hope everyone had a blessed Christmas. Please keep me in prayer over a personal matter, as two of my New Year’s resolutions are quite tough this year, but are problems in my life that need to be addressed. (Smoking is one of them.)
On to politics and predictions for the new year. I continue to think Howard Dean is gonna prove more difficult to the President’s re-election bid than what most Republicans (and Republican sympathizers like myself) realize. While Dean is currently stumping to the left in the Democrat primaries, we need to keep in mind that the Howard Dean we see now is not the Howard Dean against whom President Bush and the Republican Party will square off against in the campaign leading up to the general election.
Already we are seeing Dean discover religion. Once the Dem nomination is firmly in hand, you will like see him continue his move to the center. Likely, he will trumpet his record of balanced budgets in Vermont. We need to hold Dean to the left. Health care, taxation for middle-class families and agriculture are three areas where Dean is weak.
Next, we need to recognize that President Bush is still politically vulnerable over the war in Iraq. I know this sounds strange, but over the short-term, Dean is likely to prove right in that the capture of Saddam Hussein will not make things any safer in the West. Basically, Hussein’s capture is radicalizing the islamo-fascists who were reluctant to jump into the frey as long as Hussein was still hanging around. So don’t be surprised to see terrorist attacks increase over the coming year. Additionally, you’re seeing the Dean camp spin the fact Osama bin Looney still hasn’t been captured.
Of course, the best answer would be to capture bin Looney and/or uncover WMDs in Iraq. Barring this possibility, however, the best way to to counter the Dean spin is to point out the long-term security benefits yielded by the capture of Hussein. For example, Libya abandonning its WMD programmes is a direct result of the President’s firm leadership. Libya has had a long history of sponsoring terrorism. Additionally, Time Magazine reports that the Al Quack network has recently diverted much of its resources to Iraq. Given the geo-political makeup of Iraq versus that of Afganistan, it should be much easier to capture or kill key terrorists in Iraq than in Afganistan.
Finally, there is the gross human rights violations that took place under Saddam’s regime. A number of leftists who support the war, such as Prime Minister Tony Blair in the UK and Alexa McDonough (former leader of Canada’s socialist party) have often appealed on the left to Hussein’s brutality against his own people people as justification for the Iraq war.
What about an anti-Dean candidate? The only one of the other Democrat candidates that I think presents a credible challenge within the Dem. primaries is Joe Lieberman. Neither Braun nor Sharpton present a credible challenge. When it comes to African-Americans, the Dems prefer tokenism to actually giving blacks real power. Note that it was the GOP who appointed Clarence Thomas on the Supreme Court, Colin Powell as Secretary of State, and who have seriously floated the idea of putting Condi Rice on the 2004 ticket where she could become the first African American and the first woman to become Vice-President.
Kucinich is out of the question. Not only are his policies to the left of Dean, but he makes Al Gore look charismatic. Edwards and Gephart also lack any charisma or marketability within this race. Finally, Kerry and Clark have flip-flopped over too many issues to be credible candidates at this point. Both of them come across as desperate, and not in a good sense.
Yet where Lieberman also comes across as somewhat desperate, his centrist credentials are solid. Other than Dean, he’s the only serious candidate among the Dems who hasn’t wavered in his position on key issues such as national security. Therefore, I would not be suprised if he emerges as the key anti-Dean candidate.