CHP
Commentary

​As I write, Canada, the U.S. and the citizens of most nations around the world are experiencing anxiety, confusion and distress; governments, and the bureaucrats who sometimes speak for them, are implementing draconian lockdown orders and enforcing them with disturbing zeal. The hyped-up fear of COVID-19 and the justified fear of governments assuming dictatorial powers have worked together to shake public confidence in the institutions that have long been taken for granted.

​“This pandemic has provided us with an opportunity for a re-set”; these are the words of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as he addressed a UN conference recently. He went on to say, “this is our chance to reimagine economic systems”, and to combat poverty and climate change, among other things, and to “building back better”.

​On Friday, November 13, 2020, the BC Court of Appeals ruled against the board of the Delta Hospice Society (DHS). DHS has fought to establish and retain the right to refuse membership in the society where applicants promote euthanasia and intend to force the Irene Thomas Hospice, operated by DHS, to provide MAiD (Medical Assistance in Dying). The Delta Hospice Society President and the board have been fighting a legal battle for about a year to prevent the takeover of the palliative care society by hundreds of pro-MAiD activists who are trying to ensure that every hospice in BC participates in physician-assisted suicide.

​Tomorrow we will commemorate Remembrance Day. This year, many of us will miss the moments of shared tears as we stand beside our friends, neighbours and family members in public ceremonies to honour our veterans. This day was proclaimed by King George V, one hundred and one years ago, with this proclamation, “All locomotion should cease, so that, in perfect stillness, the thoughts of everyone may be concentrated on reverent remembrance of the glorious dead.”

Canada today stands at a crossroads. Many of our fellow-citizens have rejected God, have rejected biblical morality and have rejected respect for human life. Often we see the dwindling numbers of churchgoers or the rising numbers of gender-confused young people and we wonder if there are enough Canadians with a biblical world view to prevent the complete collapse of the social order.

​How many recent Liberal scandals and ethical violations can you name? The SNC-Lavalin scandal, the WE Charity scandal (and its numerous related mini-scandals), the blackface scandal, the Aga Khan island vacation scandal, and maybe a few others? The list is getting longer and more convoluted.

​I want to point out that the phrase separation of church and state, and its accompanying idea—institutionalized Secularism—has no place in Canadian history; and it shouldn’t be a part of Canada’s future, either.

​Absolutely, yes! But not for the reasons our divisive Prime Minister thinks. He believes and presses upon Canadians that we are systemically racist; he is preoccupied with “privilege” and “victimhood”. In short, our government seeks to divide Canadians along the lines of race, sex, ethnicity, and more. Any divide is better than no divide!

​Priorities tell you something about a person. What a person does is often more revealing than what a person says. That can also be true for an organization, a political party or a government. When Parliament reconvened on September 23 after its prorogation, it launched with a Throne Speech full of unaffordable, pie-in-the-sky promises. This is undoubtedly why the NDP has committed to supporting the scandal-saddled Liberals for now and the foreseeable future. They’re getting everything they’ve ever dreamed of and more; how could they possibly vote against it?

​No aunts, no cousins too. No siblings either. This is what young people today are being told to imagine for their grandchildren. The “One planet... one child” idea is being promoted with ads in Vancouver.

​In the old days—not so very long ago—it was common practice to actually buy votes by giving cash to voters in exchange for a promise of support at the polls. The so-called “rotten boroughs” or “pocket boroughs” in England were essentially owned by one man, or his family, and through cash incentives or the pressure imposed by a landlord, voters were persuaded to vote for the people with the money and power. On top of that, voters did not have a secret ballot, so the pressures and inducements could be applied with real consequences.

It hardly seems to be news anymore. The Liberals and their “accidental” breaking of the law is just so common that I hesitate to comment on it. Bill Morneau fined for breaking electoral law… Blah, Blah!