Sent: December 11, 2010 9:08 AM
Cc: 'email@example.com'; 'HarpeS@parl.gc.ca'; 'IgnatM@parl.gc.ca'
Subject: Sexually active girl's parents fined
Having received the article enclosed below, I’d like to volunteer, humbly, some comments.
It seems to me that of any time of the year, this article marks precisely what we witness during the time of advent, not because of the hope that advent brings us with the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but which John the Baptist and Elijah, as people that remained loyal to God refusing to follows the state just because it is the state but because it went away from the law of God.
It is interesting what goes on in Canadian courts and what is that allows that to happen and that is the political correctness with which laws are loosely produced, trying to ‘help’, to ‘assist’ in that idea that is social re-architecting. Hey, we even have the Human Rights Commissions just in case the courts go a bit out of the true ‘intentions’ of the law.
Personally, I believe in spanking in the early years so that it will not only, not be necessary in the adolescence and other ages under the ‘parental’ custody, but because at other time it will produce the opposite effect. Spanking, contrary to what the media tries us to believe, does not foment slavery but discipline and establishes authority. Yes, parents do have much more authority than the state or schools when dealing with children education is concerned.
The collectivist media has paid special attention onto ‘educating’ our children to be ‘dislocated’ from parental upbringing. Freedom is persistently expressed and mentioned as an idea of separation from authority when in reality it is more to do with will power and accountability. Authority is not an obstacle to freedom but just a vehicle that guarantees freedom.
How can any parent maintain any hope of having any type of control over a 9th grade school girl when everything conspires against his/her parental authority? Especially and particularly, the courts, because the law is written to destroy that authority, not to naturally nurture it because is natural law and order what is being assaulted and targeted.
What is a ‘sexually active girl’? What is a sexually active girl supposed to do and be able to do at her own will and responsibility?
Is a sexually active girl, supposed to be ‘prey’ for men which of course, at a similar age of sexual activity and without supervision, will find only satisfaction to his sexual urges as the only answer and so; sexually active girls are there for sexually active boys and if the girls are ‘politically correctly educated’, they too are going to see it that way. Hence, from the beauty of the age, we pass to the open satisfaction of our animal instincts.
Sex is not an end in life but the beginning of life and so needs to be clearly stated, to children and apparently some adults too.
Not too long ago, there was a debate in Canadian Parliament where the government was trying to move up the age of sexual consent, I believe from 14 to 16. It is already hard to believe that a need might exist for the law to dictate in this issue, but I guess, it means that enough predators, of both genders, of course, do exist to make our politicians worry about the situation.
The collectivist left, of course, argues that a number of ways do exist to control the potential social problems that might come consequence of informal sexual engagements; condoms and abortions, being at the front of the idea, without any consideration of course for the other social problem created as a consequence of their ‘solutions’. Babies killed like flies at the mercy of pseudo-doctors running a business of death and actually promoting sexual promiscuity from even earlier ages so that the bottom figures can increase, sodomy being promoted as well as an acceptable condition, not to mention transgender and every other perversity and degradation and there is more, governments like the one in Ontario, with very little differences across the country, because here in Canada, provincial government just follow their leader and so, children from kindergarten on, are being ‘required’ of sexual education, which of course means to find out if they are ‘naturally’ sodomites from the start. The parents of course are not being informed and the government feels not need to do so because after all in Canada, the law is the law and nobody should question the law because we have the greatest country in the world and so on… and on April 1st we need to recharge, particularly because the end of April approaches and we need to report to the government… or else.
Complacence makes tolerance look good and becomes a form of compassion when dictated from the top and where all the elements of control are in place to easily subdue any detractors. Have you paid your taxes? Have you declared your earnings? Arte you depositing more than $10,000? Why? At what speed you were driving? Don’t you know that the law is against gender discrimination and sexual orientation is a ‘right’? Women have the right to chose killing their offspring, you know?
In a free society every one is innocent until proven guilty…
Protection of life and freedom are not just to be included in the role of any government but they are the only reason for any government to exist. Life to be protected from conception to natural death and freedom to be guaranteed not ‘defined’ so that people can on their own, prosper and grow, make mistakes, or not and assume risks, or succeed and rely on friends and family for guidance and support or voluntarily share with them the benefit of their hard work.
There is only one God and one Justice coming from Him and the law needs to follow Him, not the other way around.
The only guaranteed selfless interest is love and the only vehicle for genuine peace is truth and politicians are not the people to ask for either. Only God’s design, the natural family and marriage as the union of one man and one woman before God, not the state, can provide.
The good law we are all obliged to obey, the bad law we are obliged to disobey, for the good of human dignity and the preservation of the truth.
Lastly, if a child is not good enough to drive until he or she is 16, or if is not good to drink until he or she is 19 or if is not old enough to work or to leave home, then he or she needs to rely on parental guidance, after all it is not the state who is letting any taxes go nor the banks or other financial institutions letting any interest or payments go, but parents and parents along who let their children live and grow under their roof out of nothing but love, something that comes naturally when following the right guidance, God our creator, almighty and omnipotent.
Subject: historical moment?: organized People rebelled in Court, Edmonton
"... father was escorted from the courtroom for refusing to listen to the judge,
a spectator was ejected for wearing glasses containing a video camera
and a mass chorus of objections was loudly raised after a packed room of supporters were criticized.
. . .
... "... if you live in Canada you are subject to the laws of Canada as interpreted by the courts, in this case the Supreme Court of Canada,"
said [Judge Michael ] Stevens-Guille. ..."
Sexually active girl's parents fined
By TONY BLAIS, QMI Agency
Last Updated: December 10, 2010 5:20am
EDMONTON - A bizarre case involving an Edmonton couple convicted of assault for using a belt to spank their sexually active 14-year-old daughter ended Thursday with fines.
However, that was after the father was escorted from the courtroom for refusing to listen to the judge, a spectator was ejected for wearing glasses containing a video camera and a mass chorus of objections was loudly raised after a packed room of supporters were criticized.
Lawrence (Larry) Zachow, a 60-year-old mortgage broker and pastor, and Aida Calagui-Zachow, a 54-year-old housewife, were each sentenced to 10 days in jail, which was deemed served by the five days they spent behind bars after being arrested and charged.
As well, the couple was hit with a $500 fine after being convicted of failing to appear in court for their trial.
Judge Michael Stevens-Guille noted the parents have shown no remorse and feel their religious beliefs give them the right to discipline their children as they see fit.
While he ruled he could not sentence them for their unacceptance of the rightness of their conviction, he said a strong message to parents may be useful.
"Whatever one's belief in higher authority, if you live in Canada you are subject to the laws of Canada as interpreted by the courts, in this case the Supreme Court of Canada,"said Stevens-Guille.
"Spare the rod and spoil the child is not the byword of the discipline of children in this country in 2010," he said.
The Zachows had been charged with assault with a weapon for the Jan. 15, 2008, strapping, however, the judge found them guilty of the lesser and included offence of assault.
Stevens-Guille ruled he found beyond a reasonable doubt the mother had struck her daughter with the belt "at least three times" on the buttocks on the orders of the father, who pinned her down and held her legs over her head.
However, the judge accepted the parents were disciplining the teen, not just reacting in anger to her actions.
Court heard at trial the Zachows had confronted their daughter about her dating a boy and the then-Grade 9 student had admitted to being sexually active. The "upset" Zachows then told her to break off the relationship.
The teen defiantly saw the boy again the following day and told her parents that after coming home late.
Things then escalated and resulted in her dad guiding her to her bedroom by placing his hand on her neck and pulling her hair. She was then spanked with the belt.
The teen told a school official and police were called.
On Thursday, the hearing began with Zachow repeatedly demanding the judge cease the case against him and his wife and when he refused to stop despite Stevens-Guille's insistence, the judge ordered a sheriff to remove him.
He was eventually let back in, but continued saying things suggesting he does not accept the court's jurisdiction.
Crown prosecutor Jason Track told court Zachow has "zero respect for the law" and later referred to his many supporters in the courtroom as being "like-minded."
That comment led to many of the people in the packed gallery to simultaneously yell out "objection."
A man with glasses containing a video camera was also ejected.