Skip to main content

To: Mr. Michael Ignatieff, Member of Parliament for Etobicoke—Lakeshore and Leader of the Opposition:

Mr. Michael Ignatieff, Member of Parliament for Etobicoke—Lakeshore and Leader of the Opposition:
As I have now moved my residence to your district, you are now my representative in Parliament and working for me as part of the community you represent.

Let me start this ‘relationship’ by bringing to your attention the article in LifeSiteNews.com; First Debate on Canada’s Coercive Abortion Bill Set for Monday. This talks about introduced legislation as private Bill C-510, attempts to protect women against coercion to abort, or more clearly to terminate pregnancy.

It is absurd enough to consider that in Canada, no legislation does exist to protect any human being from the beginning of life, which unless you can prove differently; start at conception and goes all the way through natural death. We all know, even if as it appear to be, under constant denial, that abortion is about destruction of life, as an assault on human dignity, not just that of the woman as a direct protagonist of such a barbaric act but especially and most particularly on the dignity of the human person in the body of that woman. It is definitively a matter of choice but is also a crime, because it involves the murdering of a baby. Criminals have free choice as well, otherwise the law would be persecuting people just for the crimes they might commit instead of everyone being innocent before being proof guilty.
Of course, the are the ones advocating this ‘right’ which women already have, advocating as well the irresponsibility of the women so that they can remain unaccountable for what they choose, yes, there is the case of rape, but the victim of a rape where the woman becomes pregnant is not just the woman, but also the innocent human being in her womb, should her the decision be to eliminate him/her so that she can be ‘free’, while abdicating the role of victim on behalf of her selfish preservation of her own life style.
What it becomes problematic about this bill is that it is already a crime to coerce anyone to do something against his/her will. In any free society as Canada claims to be, it should not be require to protect anyone from being coerced to ‘accept’ to remove a ‘tissue’, as the advocates of the so called ‘freedom of choice’ claim, let alone the fact that it is a human being who gets murdered by that choice.
We’ve been there before and over and over again. Why is it that the law is being twisted on behalf of selfishness and crime being covered just because of protecting life styles while life is threatened and freedom coerced and then our representatives, including the Prime Minister, seem to feel themselves threatened on their peace cowardice while the law is being so much altered?
We can notice a similar situation with all the efforts put for the destruction of marriage and family, it seems that certain individuals who by choice, opt for a degrading and destructive life style; they must be protected over and above everyone else even trumping individual freedoms and so new bills need to be presented to accommodate these newly invented ‘rights’.
If the need exist for such a bill, because women can have rights only for some things but not for others and so they could be legally coerced for some things but not for others, so be it in the name of the ‘slavery’ we are suffering, otherwise, that means that no such need exists to provide extra protection to anyone because that provision already exists and if so, the matter is of protection life, again, form conception to natural death and, now that we are on that, of the family and marriage as the only possible definition, as the union of one man and one woman before God, and nothing else.
I hope you all consider the illogical trend to be established should this bill be rejected, because women would be bound to obey whatever anyone else decides on their bodies, which sounds kind of the anti-thesis of what the so called ‘pro-choice’ movement predicates, except that this bill too, establishes the intention of a woman to really protect their babies in their own womb and so, to reject or accepted will reflect the hypocrisy of a system that see women as a piece of meat, politically exploitable and sexually profitable and human beings over all as nothing but commodities to be manipulated, degraded to inhuman levels that go even lower than most animals or species populating the earth.
As my representative, I am asking you to vote in favour of this bill C-510 while it is only a protection for something already available but politically nullified. by correctness, the dignity of women and babies and the freedom to be accountable and responsible for the choices exercised under that freedom.

César Fernández-Stoll

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Lord, teach us to pray, just as John taught his disciples

Gospel text ( L uke 11,1-4): One day Jesus was praying in a certain place and when He had finished, one of his disciples said to him, «Lord, teach us to pray, just as John taught his disciples». And Jesus said to them, «When you pray, say this: Father, hallowed be your name, may your kingdom come, give us each day the kind of bread we need, and forgive us our sins, for we also for-give all who do us wrong, and do not bring us to the test»

Money

Is money the ultimate goal, the end of all means? Nowadays, it seems, everything is not just measured in terms of money, but everything needs to be, has to be, in terms of money. Money is set as the goal, over anything. Money is meant to be just a media for exchange of goods and services, not a goal on itself, yet our society has corrupted onto making of money a statement beyond life, family, marriage and most definitively above love and truth. Such a philosophy has degraded our souls to the point of denying everything that is in conflict with the value of money. Even when charity is concerned, it seems mercy can only be measured in monetary terms, as if charity could be measured by anyone except God alone. If there is crusade or cause to be enrolled, the only acceptable way has been institutionalized as the amount of money it can be contributed, regardless of the individual efforts that could be applied or spent.

A matter of life or death

Maybe I am the only one in Ontario, ‘experiencing’ a confrontation with the 407ETR corporation, or maybe not. So far it seems the fact is that I am not, that many out there are subjected to billing from the corporation. No, I am not saying unfair, discriminatory or any of the kind, but I am going to say, unsupported and unsubstantiated. The issue of the matter is that the corporation, for some presumably important reason, is blessed by the province of Ontario to have the ability to stop the licensing of any individual who fail to pay the corporation anything they ask for even if they apparently, are not able to support with facts what they claim.