Monday, November 16, 2015

Je suis Paris

On Friday November 13th in Paris, France, ISIS opened fire and killed 129 people (350 injured and 99 in critical condition).
An online statement said eight militants armed with explosive belts and automatic weapons attacked carefully chosen targets in the “capital of adultery and vice,” including a soccer stadium where France was playing Germany, and the Bataclan concert hall, where an American rock band was playing, and “hundreds of apostates were attending an adulterous party.” -- MacLean's
Will western civilization finally reject political correctness, and call a spade a spade?

Will America and other western nations have the courage to correctly label its enemy?

The Enemy is Islamist Extremism and Shariah

The enemy of western civilization is Shariah law and those Islamist extremists who consider all non-Muslims to be apostates and infidels worthy of death. They usually shout out "Allahu Akbar!" just before killing us. Here is a portion of the ISIS statement claiming responsibility for the Paris attacks:
The stench of death will not leave their noses as long as they remain at the forefront of the Crusaders’ campaign, dare to curse our prophet, boast of a war on Islam in France, and strike Muslims in the lands of the caliphate ... -- MacLean's
I think it's time to heed Mark Steyn's words. I agree with him completely when he says:
I'm Islamed out. I'm tired of Islam 24/7, at Colorado colleges, Marseilles synagogues, Sydney coffee shops, day after day after day. The west cannot win this thing with a schizophrenic strategy of targeting things and people but not targeting the ideology, of intervening ineffectually overseas and not intervening at all when it comes to the remorseless Islamization and self-segregation of large segments of their own countries. -- The Barbarians Are Inside, And There Are No Gates
Here in Canada, Muslims have previously attempted to bring Shariah law into the mainstream when Syed Mumtaz Ali (deceased), initiated a movement to allow the practice of Shariah law in Ontario. His motion was supported by former NDP attorney general Marion Boyd who wanted to allow Muslims to establish Shariah-based tribunals. In the end, Premier Dalton McGuinty, rejected the motion after protests from within the Muslim community (Ontario Premier rejects use of Shariah law). Thank God!

I am Paris

Earlier this year, when Islamist extremists attacked Charlie Hebdo, the slogan, "Je suis Charlie", immediately followed in a show of solidarity. I supported and still do support that form of free speech, regardless of its blasphemous insults.
Op-ed cartoons are classic free speech. They are aimed at stirring up public debate. They may be shocking and provocative, but their main purpose is satire to make a greater political point. -- Charlie Hebdo and the limits of free speech
What annoys me, however, is the inability of many people in the west to show support for Charlie Hebdo after the journalists were slaughtered. Rather than supporting Charlie Hebdo, people like Bill Donohue of the Catholic Civil Rights league had the nerve to suggest that Charlie Hebdo brought it upon themselves (Muslims are right to be angry, January 7, 2005). I find this kind of reaction shameful. Regardless of Charlie Hebdo's choice of words, nothing they say, no matter how blasphemous, should make them targets of Islamic extremists.

I consider myself an observant and devoted Catholic, and even though Charlie Hebdo's satirical cartoons have offended me and my religion, my reaction is to ignore them rather than to kill them. I'm all for free speech, even if I don't like what is being said. We have a right to speak, but we don't have the right to not be offended. Being offended is not a human rights issue, even though Alberta's 'crazy' human rights commission has made it so. By the way, I'm a huge fan of Ezra Levant for taking them on (Ezra Levant: ‘Crazy’ prosecutions).

I make no distinction between Charlie Hebdo and the citizens of Paris in terms of their right to freely go about their daily business. Whether they are dancing in night clubs, attending concerts, dining in restaurants, working for their employer (e.g., Charlie Hebdo), or even committing adultery, they are free to do whatever they please without being killed by Islamist extremists.

My Response to Jonathon Van Maren

Although I greatly respect writer and pro-life speaker, Jonathon Van Maren, I disagree with his position of not being able to stand with Charlie Hebdo. Earlier this year, he claimed that choosing between "Je suis Charlie" and "bloodthirsty Islamism" was a false choice.
That is why I will not say 'Je Suis Charlie.' Because, while I admire the physical courage of the murdered cartoonists, I also know that the nihilism they and their magazine promoted is the very stuff on which Islamism feeds and thrives. -- Jonathon Van Maren
My response to Jonathan Van Maren is two-fold. First of all, it is not a false choice between "Je suis Charlie" and "bloodthirsty Islamism". Just because you may not agree with either option, it doesn't mean that you shouldn't side with the victims. Think about this fictitious school yard scenario for the purpose of argument: a gang of bullies with knives approaches a group of teenagers in the act of embarrassing an innocent female student by painting a nude picture of her on one of the school walls. The gang of bullies stabs several of the boys who were creating the graffiti on the walls. The next day you learn about what happened, and also that one of the victims died. Will you stand in solidarity with the boys who were creating the inappropriate graffiti, or will you support neither, claiming it to be a "false choice"? Clearly, there is a moral position to take, and by not making a choice, that would be equivalent to being indifferent, thus morally wrong. Even if it's not your fight, everyone is affected, and everyone is involved, whether you like it or not.

Secondly, one should never forget that Islam has a history of invading and ruling other countries. In India, for instance, the Mughal emperor, Aurangzeb, was a Muslim who imposed Shariah law on Hindus. Thousands of Hindu temples and shrines were destroyed and a punitive Hindu tax was imposed. Aurangzeb also invaded Hindu kingdoms in central and southern India, conquering territory and taking slaves.

Sikhs against Islamist Extremists

I don't think it is too far-fetched to think that Islamist extremist groups such as ISIS will go to any length in trying to impose Shariah law on the rest of us. Perhaps the west should be reminded of the Sikh warriors of the 17th century who opposed and fought against extremist Muslims during Aurangzeb's reign:
  • Guru Arjan Dev, refused the forceful conversion to Islam, and was put to death by boiling in a cauldron and sitting on a hot iron plate.
  • Guru Hargobind, engaged in warfare against extremist Muslims, and advised the Sikhs to take up military training and martial arts. He fought in the following battles: Battle of Rohilla, Battle of Kartarpur, Battle of Amritsar, Battle of Hargobindpur, Battle of Gurusar, Battle of Kiratpur
  • Guru Tegh Bahadur was subject to extreme torture for five days (he was made to sit on hot iron plates, hot oil was poured on his body, and he was boiled in hot water) for not converting to Islam. Aurengzeb finally beheaded him.
  • Guru Gobind Singh established the Khalsa - a group of men and women dedicated to living in equality and peace, but willing to fight and lay down their lives to protect themselves and others from injustice and tyranny. Guru Gobind Singh's two eldest sons died in battle, and his two younger sons were captured and bricked alive inside a wall and died.
The Crusades

The Battle of Lepanto
Catholics also have a history of battle with Muslim invaders who slaughtered and enslaved as they fought their way westward toward Europe. The purpose of the Crusades was to recover ancient Christian territory that was previously occupied by Christians and Jews for centuries.
The problem with all the wrong interpretations of the Crusades — that they were motivated by economics, or by the wish to establish European colonies in the area, or for purposes of enriching a particular government, knight or the Church itself — is a historic misunderstanding of the endeavor. They were none of these. They were motivated by the holy desire to gain one’s salvation by fighting to regain Christian lands in the Middle East. In short, they were motivated by Faith. For this Faith, kings, bishops, priests, and ordinary soldiers were willing to fight and die.

The author stresses that the Crusades (or any other historical event) must be understood in light of the times in which they occurred, not from the perspective of the time during which the history is written. This will always give a false impression of the incidents or movements. One must know the medieval Catholic way of thinking — that the Faith was everything, that the lands were stolen by unbelieving and brutal marauders, and that it was important to amass large groups of believers to go on armed pilgrimage to the Holy Land to take that land back for the Christians from whom it was stolen. The Crusades (a term only coined in the early 1700’s) were truly religious pilgrimages, but this time armed, the first armed pilgrimages in the history of Catholicism. -- 
The Real Truth About the Crusades: The Glory of the Crusades

I hope and pray that western nations are "Islamed out", and have had enough. When will enough be enough? Only time will tell. For now, we'll just have to wait and see. I am glad that at least Anonymous has decided to wage war against ISIS, and has vowed to take them down. There is hope.


Tuesday, November 10, 2015

Campus Freedom Index

The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms recently published its 2015 Campus Freedom Index, which grades the policies and practices of fifty-five Canadian universities.

Parents who are already aware of stifling free speech issues on university campuses will appreciate the effort put in by authors, John Carpay (President) and Michael Kennedy (Communications and Development). Their report provides a good indication of the free-speech climate at Canadian universities.
While other major Canadian university rankings provide statistics on student life, classroom size and faculty quality, the Campus Freedom Index is the first resource available for Canadian high school students and parents to help them to choose a school that will encourage—not stifle—their free expression rights on campus. This report also provides information to aid current students, as well as faculty and administrators, in improving the state of free at their schools, by clearly indicating which policies and practices support free speech and which of these needs to be improved. (2015 Campus Freedom Index, page 1)
Below is a snapshot of the best and worst university policies and practices, and the best and worst student union policies and practices.

Here's the full report:


Friday, November 6, 2015

Six good men publicly rebuke Trudeau on abortion

Trudeau flunks Catechism 101
I really couldn't care less about the balanced gender and slightly browner skin-tone demographics in Trudeau's cabinet. What matters more is diversity of ideas. Trudeau extinguished the diversity of ideas when he banned pro-life MPs from the Liberal party last year.
Then as one man’s trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one man’s act of righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all men. For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by one man’s obedience many will be made righteous. Law came in, to increase the trespass; but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, so that, as sin reigned in death, grace also might reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. -- Romans 5: 18-21
To make matters worse, after Trudeau's edict, only 6 out of 87 English and French bishops publicly rebuked him for it. Don't the bishops recognize that abortion is equivalent to genocide?

Death Count
Mao78 Million (1943-1976)
Abortion in America53 Million (1973-2011)
Stalin23 Million (1922-1953)
Hitler17 Million (1934-1945)
Leopold II of Belgium15 Million (1865-1909)
Abortion in China13 Million (2008)
Hideki Tojo5 Million (1941-1944)
Abortion in Canada3.5 Million (1974-2013)
Ismail Enver Pasha
Armenian Genocide
2.5 Million (1913-1919)

I think all Catholics in Canada should recognize these six good men for speaking publicly against Trudeau and his pro-abortion stance. Catholic schools across Canada should take down any portraits of pro-abortion politicians, and replace them with portraits of these men:

Left to right: Cardinal Lacroix, Archbishop Smith, Archbishop Henry, Cardinal Collins, Auxiliary Bishop Riesbeck, Archbishop Prendergast
Canada’s bishops could “consider excommunicating” Trudeau, and other Catholic politicians “who refuse to take their Catholic faith into the legislature” because “they’re scandalizing the faithful.” -- Geoffrey F. Cauchi, LL.B
More innocent people will die from abortion and euthanasia as a result of Canada's new Liberal majority government.

Catholic priests and bishops need our prayers and encouragement. Let's pray that they gain in wisdom and courage - to speak the truth openly in the public square.
Cardinal Collins to Catholic Trudeau: Your abortion policy would ban Pope Francis from Liberal Party

Pregnant women with unwanted unborn babies also need our prayers. This excellent YouTube video provides real life stories on the options available to women who think that abortion is their only option. There is a better option: open adoption.

A number of other countries facing declining birthrates have offered similar incentives. Australia offers a $4,000 bonus for every baby, and recently proposed to pay all child care costs for women who want to work. Many European countries, including France, Italy and Poland, have offered some combination of bonuses and monthly payments to families.

Some Japanese localities, facing near catastrophic population loss, are offering rich incentives. Yamatsuri, a town of 7,000 just north of Tokyo, offers parents $4,600 for the birth of a child and $460 a year for 10 years. Singapore has a particularly lavish plan: $3,000 for the first child, $9,000 in cash and savings for the second; and up to $18,000 each for the third and fourth.

Thursday, October 22, 2015

Priests: step up your game and preach like Cardinal Arinze

Since 2002 I have probably attended over seven hundred Catholic Masses. Not once have I ever heard a priest deliver a homily that discussed anything about contraception, pre-marital sex, abortion, adultery, polygamy, homosexuality, or euthanasia. Priests today are either infected with the PC (political correctness) disease, or they are simply too afraid to speak the truth. But, what are they afraid of?
  • Are they are afraid of their superiors? 
  • Are they afraid of lower church attendance? 
  • Are they afraid of receiving fewer donations?
  • Are they afraid of damaging their own reputation?
  • Are they afraid of losing popularity?
I'm sure there are plenty of other excuses and reasons why priests are "silent" when they preach. If you can think of more reasons, I'd really like to read your comments at the bottom of this post.

I'm praying for the day when new priests will arrive on the scene, and preach like Cardinal Arinze. The video below is a wonderful example of how to speak the truth. This is the kind of clarity that is so desperately needed in the West today. If only our priests could step up their game, and rise to the occasion! For starters, rather than limiting homilies to a measely 5 to 10 minutes, priests need to unload, preach without the fluff, and give us a good 30-minute lecture before the Profession of Faith and Liturgy of the Eucharist begins.

Now I understand why the hope and future of the Catholic Church resides in Africa, and nowhere else.

If priests don't like the good Cardinal's example, well perhaps they should consider following the example of the Lord Himself:
“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that every one who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and throw it away; it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away; it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body go into hell." -- Matthew 5:27-30

Sunday, October 18, 2015