An Informed Voter is Necessary For The Survival of A Nation
There are two weeks until the federal election in Canada, and I am afraid that there is a lot of information, particularly about Mark Carney, that is not getting out to the voting public. My last article laid out numerous issues that I have learned of that should dismiss Mark Carney as a potential Prime Minister for Canada. These issues vary from policy positions to blatant conflicts of interest that he is intentionally not making the Canadian public aware of prior to the federal election on April 28. I don't want to make this a regular feature on this blog, but I still maintain that this federal election is existential for this country. Mark Carney's ideas are such that, should he retain the role of Prime Minister, by the time his four year term is up, this country will be unrecognizable. I think I will plan to write two more articles laying out issues that I think the voters should be aware of; one today and one towards the end of next week. This plan may have to be adjusted if a lot more information comes out in the next two weeks.
In this article, I am going to include a criticism of the Poilievre platform regarding the Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID) program. I want to make it clear that I will criticize anyone who is worthy of criticism, even if I am otherwise in support of them. Earlier today I saw an article headline that stated that the Conservatives were not going to change the MAID programs stipulations surrounding mental health and doctor assisted suicide. This is both good and bad, but since I think that the program as a whole is absolutely reprehensible, it turns out to be mostly bad.
First the "good" part of this platform promise, which requires a foundational understanding of the MAID program. The federal Liberals have plans to include people suffering with mental health issues within the framework of acceptable reasons to permit doctors to help them kill themselves. The original legislation for MAID included the stipulation that death of the individual was foreseeable; adding the mental health carve out essentially eliminates that stipulation while it still remains on the books. While someone could live a long life with mental health issues, if they simply claim that their issues make life unbearable, they can have the taxpayers cover the cost of the government ending their life. As with most of the Liberal legislation passed in the last ten years, the wording is vague and allows for a wide scope of interpretation - that seems to be the way the Liberals like to run things. The legislation for adding the stipulation for mental health has already passed the House of Commons, thanks to the Liberal/NDP coalition that nobody asked for and nobody wanted, but the implementation has been delayed until 2027 due to concerns from the provinces. These are not moral concerns, these concerns revolve around the number of people trained for this.
We have become an immoral country and I am afraid that God will determine that we deserve a government that will destroy this country.
Further to this issue, the Quebec provincial government has also begun to allow advance directives for doctor assisted suicides in the instance that certain parameters are met in the future by someone who is losing their cognitive abilities. The federal law does not currently allow this, yet the federal Liberals have not intervened against Quebec's expansion of the law in this manner, thereby giving it's unofficial acceptance of this position. This tells us that the federal Liberals are onboard with this as a potential next step.
This is where the tiny "good" position of the Conservatives comes in. Pierre Poilievre has stated that his government will not pursue advance directives in the MAID legislation [a]. That is where the "good" ends. Mr. Poilievre has, unfortunately also stated that his party would not seek to restrict the MAID program from it's current state. That tells me that they will include mental health as a legitimate claim to seek death under the MAID program. That is the bad part. Out of an over-abundance of misplaced "compassion", we have become a nation where the sanctity of human life has been reduced to a point where it's value can be measured in the perceived level of one's own suffering. We all go through hard times, but this program moves so fast that there are no sufficient safeguards against someone going through a non-permanent difficulty seeking to end their life. There have also been reports of people seeking surgeries for easily addressed physical issues, such as hip replacements or heart surgery, who have been offered MAID as a potential option for them. This offer has become a requirement for doctors to offer to their patients, regardless of their personal views on it. The culture of death in this country is growing under the umbrella of so-called "love" and "compassion". God is not happy with us, and the fact that Pierre Poilievre is not willing to revisit this issue is a strike against him. I only offer him a reprieve on this issue because it is his job to represent the views of Canadians. I have my doubts that a majority of Canadians are actually in favour of this, but until our hearts are turned back to God, Poilievre does not have the political capital to change this.
Unfortunately, the threat to our country from the only other option for government is too great to make a big deal out of this issue. We need a Conservative majority government to right this ship and save us from a dystopian future, one that includes government overreach in all manners of commerce, religious exercise and online censorship.
This leads us to a couple more issues that have come up from the Liberal campaign which are issues that the electorate should know about as well, but which seem to be getting little airtime from the media, who appear to be doing everything they can to promote the Liberal party over the Conservatives.
One issue that should be of great concern for all Canadians, but doesn't seem to resonate with enough of us is the matter of sex change procedures for minors. A recent Post Millennial article [b] stated that "Canadian Liberal Leader Prime Minister Mark Carney has pledged to defend sex change treatments for minors, describing the procedures as a "fundamental right" for all Canadians." This is a problem. Even puberty blockers, which are a first step for minors seeking a sex change, have life long consequences, and while European countries are beginning to recognize the damages that have been perpetrated by allowing sex changes in minors and have begun reversing their policies around them, in North America, our politicians still have not recognized this and see it as a political wedge issue over anything else. This is something else that this country will pay a price for. I suppose I may need to write an entire article on the issue of sex changes for minors; bearing that in mind, I will not justify my position here, but anybody who truly cares for our young people should not be in favour of allowing life altering decisions to be made by pubescent and even prepubescent children. They simply do not have the mental capacity to fully understand the consequences of these decisions and they require the steady hand of responsible adults to step in and save them; this happens for too seldom, and the Liberals are gung-ho in pushing for the advancement of this issue.
The other issue that has recently come to my attention is in regards to the matter of charitable status for religious organizations, as is highlighted in an article found in the Niagara Independent newspaper [c]. It is worthwhile for you to take the two to three minutes required to read this article in order to better understand this issue, and my sources are all taken from this article, but it breaks down as follows. In December of 2024, "the House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance released Report 21, Pre-Budget Consultations in Advance of the 2025 Budget. The 300-page report included Recommendation 429: “No longer provide charitable status to anti-abortion organizations” and Recommendation 430: “Amend the Income Tax Act to provide a definition of a charity which would remove the privileged status of “advancement of religion” as a charitable purpose." These changes to the tax laws were recommended to the government by the B.C. Humanist Association, and according to the article, the government did not consult with nor offer any rationale to the affected charities before including the recommendations in their report.
This is a highly under-reported yet significant issue that will affect thousands of charitable organizations and tens or even hundreds of thousands of people who rely on the services provided by these organizations. According to “Why Religious Tax Exemptions Benefit All Canadians”, an article written for the think tank CARDUS, the value of the work that is undertaken by these charitable organizations is worth 10.47 times the increase in the value of the tax income that the government would receive. The elimination of the tax exemption status for these organizations would likely lead to the collapse of most of them, which would leave many tens of thousands of people needing help from other non-religious organizations and/or the government itself. If the government steps in, according to the above numbers, it would cost taxpayers ten times more to provide this help than if the organizations are left to their own devices under the current tax structure. The fact that the government is listening to a single, and decidedly biased, organization for these recommendations without hearing the concerns of the affected organizations should be a grave concern for all of us. This will not just affect Christian organizations, but any organization that operates under the banner of any religion, be it Muslim, Sikh, Hindu, Buddhist, etc. I can honestly admit that I don't care about the status of any other religion in this matter, but together we have the strength to tell the government to back off, while alone, any one of these religions does not have the clout.
Given that this nation's Charter of Rights and Freedoms opens with the line "Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law:", and that the first right laid out in the Charter states that "Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of conscience and religion;", one would think that removing the recognition of organizations that operate under the will of God, or "god" as it may be, from tax protections in the name of the promotion of said religion should be antithetical to our very Charter of Freedoms. One should note that revocation of charitable status is being sought against organizations that oppose abortion under Recommendation 429; I wonder if organizations that promote abortion current enjoy charitable status protection. This is a purely political attack against those who oppose abortion in particular, given that these two recommendations are consecutive in order, they are forwarded by the same group and will both affect largely Christian organizations. This is religious discrimination, yet the government fails to recognize it as such.
Justin Trudeau, sometime after his election in 2015, boldly and unilaterally proclaimed Canada as the world's first post-national state [d]; he has since been working quietly behind the scenes to also make Canada a post-religious nation, and Mark Carney appears eager to continue on that trajectory. In fact, I maintain that Justin Trudeau was a puppet leader who received his marching orders in part from Mark Carney. We can look at Great Britain and how far that country has fallen in the last decade or so, significantly while Mark Carney was bending the ears of politicians who have enacted nation killing policies that continue to wreak havoc in that country. We cannot allow Mark Carney to be given the reins of this country for any length of time besides that which has already been outside of our control, or we will fail to recognize our own country in short order as well. We are already well on our way to that, as I don't recognize many aspects of the country in which I grew up, and that is a crying shame.
I will admit that this blog does not have a far-reaching audience. I won't usually request that you share the articles that I write, but given the weight of this election, if you find these political articles eye-opening, please feel free to share them on your own social media platforms. If this information is new to you, it will probably be new to those you know as well, and we need to get as much of this information out there as we can. Canadians need to know what they are voting for, and I pray that we will send an unmistakably strong message to the federal Liberals, Mark Carney and all those with whom he is associated that Canada is not interested in a post-national, post-religious dystopian future that they have in mind for us.
Visit my home page to see if there are any other articles that might interest you.
Comments
Post a Comment