Defending Marriage

Many people are unaware that Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of British Columbia has been conducting a review of the topic of polygamy. This has been done in light of the news coming out of the Mormon community of Bountiful in B.C.

The study was conducted to determine whether or not the ban on polygamous relationships in Canada was legal. There was a great deal of concern that an appeal to the Charter of Rights would see this ban struck down. However, Chief Justice Robert Bauman has conducted what has been called "one of the most extensive reviews of the topic of polygamy that has ever been undertaken," and has found that the ban should stand.

His findings demonstrate clearly that a great deal of harm is done - to women, children, men and monogamous marriage - when polygamy is allowed. It is this demonstrated "harm" that lead the Chief Justice to rule that parliament's ban on "poly" relationships should stand.

This is good news for vulnerable women and children in particular, but also for Canadian society and all who want traditional marriage to continue to be the norm. For a more in-depth report go here. For the full Court document, go here.

Related Articles:
Worldview - Part 3 - Morality
I'm offended!
Why I Believe In Marriage
Wanted: Best Friend
Dehydrated Food

Restoring Sanity - It's A Start!

The U.S. Supreme Court recently upheld the "partial-birth" abortion ban, making the procedure illegal in the United States. The real question is, why did it take so long? During the procedure, the cervix is dilated, the fetus is partially extracted, the skull is punctured and the brain tissue removed before the fetus is fully removed from the birth canal. It is typically done late in the second trimester or in some cases during the last three months. It is now known that the fetus at this stage of development feels excruciating pain.

The response from the usual suspects has been typical. Hilary Clinton was disappointed because it inhibited a woman's right to choose. Barrack Obama "strongly disagreed" with the ruling, fearing that it would erode the rights of women. There are many other voices being raised in support of partial birth abortion in the name of "women's rights" but the arguments don't hold water.

The universal fear seems to be that somehow a woman's life might be at risk if this procedure is not allowed, yet, in the time that it has been allowed, in not one situation that I've heard of has it been considered medically necessary. Yet in each case someone died - the child! There have been approximately 2,200 partial birth abortions done yearly, according to R. Alta Charo, a professor of law and bioethics at the University of Wisconsin in Madison.

Exactly where are we as a society when it is considered reasonable to debate that somehow this "procedure" is acceptable? It is merely a short step from this to infanticide - and merely a matter of degree. Yet some of those vying for the top office in the U.S. would actually speak out in favour. Scary.

North of the border the situation is even more obscene. There is absolutely no law governing abortion in Canada and a child is not considered human in law until he or she emerges fully from the birth canal. The politicians who are even concerned about this are few and far between. More than 100,000 abortions take place in Canada each year - paid for by the taxpayers!

I believe that history will look back on our time and consider the abortion mills in the same light as the gas chambers of World War II. With what we now know about the unborn child, and with the ability of doctors to do surgery on younger and younger fetuses, how is it possible to justify abortion? It seems to me to be schizophrenic that we can do surgery on a fetus (using pain medication) in one part of a hospital, while aborting a fetus of the same age in another part of the same hospital. Please someone - explain to me the rationale.

My prayer is that I live to see the end of legalized abortion.