betsy

And yet the Liberal strategist frankly admitted he doesn't know what's up with Ignatieff announcing the funding for the arena. All the panelists, including the hostess of Power and Politics were all unanimous that the optics are not good - it looks like Ignatieff is buying votes! It's been pointed out how absurd that Ignatieff would be circling on that issue of the arena after the Conservatives had tried their best to distance themselves from it. Extraordinary curriculum vitae he may have - but he's difinetly bombing as a leader of a political party! If this is how he leads his party, how can you expect him to lead a nation. Perhaps he ought to go back to being a journalist and a historian.

I guess you've got a good point there.

The only ad I've seen so far is the one showing the Economic Action Plan. Granted it is extolling the accomplishments of this government....but on the other hand, it also makes sense to advertise it. We've already spent billions giving out stimulus packages....why should we risk that by changing government when we're still trying to recover from the crisis? IT IS IMPERATIVE to remind Canadians about that! It is imperative to let the world know, Investors/Consumers: this is what we did! The world ought to be reminded that we are stable! What, you throw out billions on stimulus spendings.....and get stingy on $26 million to promote the stimulus you spent? I have no real problem about the usage of the "Harper Government." Harper's been villified and demonized since way before he even got into office. His name, "Harper" has been associated with vile, neo-con, extremist, right-wing, supremacists, etc.., Heck, they even gave negative nuance about his son's shyness to hug him in public. So now he is saying, "it is Harper sitting at the helm when the world was hit by the crisis...and Canada is one of the few ones left standing!" We came out not so bad, considering the problems other industrialist countries are faced with. I think he deserves the privilege to erase the negatives and vileness that the Oppositions tarred him with. That we - the taxpayers - pay the price for "cleaning up" the image of our Prime Minister....#26 million is still peanuts, considering the confidence and morale boosting this will generate to our economy.

It makes you wonder why 2 months before the budget's out, the Liberal Party's so adamant to reject the budget they haven't seen. It makes you wonder why weeks before the Oda, the In-and-Out, the Court ruling, the two-times contempt on Parliament ruling.....the LIberal Party has already made up its mind to trigger an election. The recent controversies only gave the convenient excuse to make this determination easier to trigger. It makes you wonder why Ignatieff is shooting his foot by such a reckless, desperate announcement such as the funding of an arena....at a time of economic distress. It makes you wonder why with such a consistently dismal poll projection....the Liberal Party is still quite determined to have this election. I suspect that behind closed doors, Ignatieff's been told he has to go. As the policy of the Liberal Party seems to be that a leader has to go through at least one election before he can be booted out....this spring must be it for Ignatieff. Come what may, win or lose.....there has to be an election. Soon. The Liberals know they need a new leader.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feticide

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Born_alive_rule

Political parties? You mean Oppositions getting a budget from public funds to advertise their parties? No. Anyway, what exactly is this government advertising all about?

$26 million? That's peanuts compared to Liberals spending $300 million to advertise in Quebec (which later on became or is related to the Sponsorship scandal). And there wasn't even any recession then! Anyway, so what if they do remind us Canadians what this government had accomplished that made our economy better than all the rest! We are still on the path of recovery! That kind of advertising will inspire confidence which will help get investors and create more jobs! It's boosting for the morale. That's pro-active. People ought to be reminded who's at the helm in the time of this economic crisis. At least it's not money going to an arena. Ignatieff - who isn't Prime Minister yet - is already promising to spend taxpayers' money on an arena. At a time like this when economy is still fragile. Really. Just shows you what Conservative ads about Ignatieff is true: He ain't here for you!

Why would this be confusing? I'm stating a fact. The morning-after pill is an abortifacent. Why shouldn't I mention various cases why women get pregnant? Pro-choice debaters here had mentioned cases of rapes and incests. Whether it's by rape or sheer negligence....what the morning-after pill's supposed to accomplish remains the same. Prevent a pregnancy.

Well here's the latest breakdown from the same journal. And here's from UK: Both stats indicate that abortion is being used a birth control method. Furthermore, Canada stats are no longer accurate. It makes you wonder why record-keeping is not enforced! I bet there's something ugly they don't want us to see.

STATISTICS http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3634/is_199701/ai_n8748633/ Please take note of the statements which I highlighted. Obviously abortion is being abused and used as a mean of birth control. Repeat abortion is getting higher. And if you are concerned about the health of the woman....what about the repercussions of repeat procedures? This makes the reasons for legalizing abortion seem a sham or a farce! In the meantime, you advocate the killings of fetuses....for what? Something so shallow like this?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6385208/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/ Anyway...the fetus need not be specifically described as a human to be considered a human. It goes without saying, after all what is the offspring of a human if not a human. The first wave Feminist Movement obviously thought of the fetus as a human. Their quest for the right to their body did not include abortion as a way of preventing unwanted pregnancies. There is that instinct to protect the fetus. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-wave_feminism The second wave of Feminism also tried to follow the first wave it seems. Apparently abortion was not even mentioned. It was only when Larry Lader convinced a reluctant Friedan to make abortion the issue simply because all feminist demands (equal education, jobs, pay, etc.) hinged on a woman's ability to control her own body and procreation. http://www.abortiontv.com/Misc/Feminism.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_Nathanson Why did the development of ultrasound lead Dr Nathanson to re-consider his position on abortion. He even went on to describe abortion as "the most atrocious holocaust" in the history of the United States. This was a very dramatic turn-around, to say the least, for someone who was one of the founders of abortion.

double posting.

Single motherhood no longer bring any stigma and shame! In fact single motherhood is now norm. So many different types of birth control devices became widespread. So many $$$ spent on sex eduication! Birth control devices given as freebies! You guys cheered and welcomed the morning-after pills. After all, it's an abortifacent....especially made for those who forgot to take precaution, those who threw precaution to the wind, rape case, incest cases, etc.., And yet, it's true all those are not enough. Which only prove what I've said previously, that abortion is now no longer just about mothers' health at risk. Abortion became just another birth control method. That's what you guys want to achieve. Killing a fetus comes so easily just like squashing a bug. That's the "value" of life. "Sanctimonious" takes on a whole new meaning when one doesn't want to be told that this is wrong. So let's throw that "self-important" title directly where it appropriately and rightfully belongs. As for bigotry, it's not the conservative right who de-humanized the fetus in the same way that Hitler de-humanized the Jews!

Whatever. :lol:

Whatever.

No, you're not officially on "ignore." Ad hominems and unnecessary rudeness. I just don't feel you're worth the time. Bye.

Of course the left is expected to do the heavy promotion! After all, whose idea was it to bring about birth control anyway? That's your baby. You promote it! Why would you expect Christian Churches to promote it??? Birth control runs against most Christians' belief, since it encourages promiscuity! Abstinence is what most, if not all Christian Churches advocates, and indeed, it is a method of birth control. A natural method of birth control. But the point I'm making is: despite what the Catholic Church says, it did not matter at all. As you yourself said, the use of birth control devices is widespread. What's stopping the left from doing a heavy promotion in those places??? If the left was able to persuade millions of people in western societies to ignore what the Christian Churches preach in their pulpits, surely you can do the same in other countries. Furthermore, just with the additional incentives the use of condoms give (prevention of STD, population explosion, food shortage), one would think the left would strive to re-double their effort, if not more, to get everyone on condoms! You've got a lot of Hollywood celebrities, not to mention the leftist media, who'd be more than willing to do their share to help in this endeavor, I'm sure. Hence I used the anti-smoking campaign as an example. The amount of focused energy and resources that went into this campaign, which even resulted in the trumping of private property rights, shows what a very determined left can do. How come we don't see that same determination with the promotion of condoms? Especially when you consider the inclusive benefits attached to its success - prevention of STD, controlling population explosion, food shortages - issues also dear to the left? If you can eliminate several problems with one stone....wouldn't you go for it?? One thing admirable with the left....once they get a target in mind, they do a thorough job to get it enforced. Nothing stands in the way!

© John Wilks B.Pharm. M.P.S., M.A.C.P.P. Oct 1998 http://www.pfli.org/faq_oc.html

Let me say it again. As a Christian, my personal endorsement is abstinence until marriage. With that being said, I am also looking at this in a practical manner since not all people are practicing Christians, let alone believe in God. So I do think that birth control devices are the obvious practical means to preventing pregnancy. That's why I'd like to see the same passion given by the left when they tackled an anti-smoking campaign in promoting the use of condoms. Granted that pills and morning-after pills are considered abortifacent, this abortion process happens before the fetus is developed enough to feel pain. If I'm not mistaken the abortifacent occurs within the 7 days. How does the fetus look like at that stage? Not that this is an excuse for it, from my own personal view as a Christian I must add....for this is still murder. But in this social climate of self-absorption/self-worship/relativism, when no one takes personal responsibility for their own actions anymore, when distinction between right and wrong is blurred, when instant gratification rules....it's like talking to the wall. In the meantime, countless fetus at various stages in wombs are being ripped apart. This abortion that's being supported by half the population has evolved into a diabolical, all-too barbaric practice! It begs question as to the psychological state of doctors who are only too willing to perform this killing. Some doctors must genuinely think they're helping the women....but how many of these doctors are deriving perverted satisfaction in the actual killings? If we are going to kill someone, don't we want to do it in the most humane way as much as possible? If we can be humane in killing animals and criminals, surely we can do that to an innocent and helpless fetus. So for me, it's a matter of choosing the lesser evil.

According to Wiki:

Well I guess I have to agree with you here. Of course, one thing we have to face is the fact that seeing how effective Islamist terrorism is in its intimidating method (as we can see how media seem to shy away from really tackling it), surely other groups or individuals are likely to be inspired by this method. Islamist terrorism is the most potent right now - not that I'm dismissing other terrorist acts by other groups for whatever reasons they may have - but obviously it is Islamist terrorism that is front and center and all over the world. Therefore it is imperative for governments to face this head-on and deal with it....otherwise acts of terrorism will just be another normal course of action by anyone who want to enforce something or get anything.

Too risky for Harper to call the election. The voters will turn on him. If all Opposition Parties got together and defeat the government....Harper can say that the Liberals never wanted to make Parliament work, that it's all an opportunistic move. That, plus the economy will make for a powerful campaign, considering how badly Ignatieff is deemed as a leader in the first place. The only thing is to survive from today until the 22nd without any more scandals happening. Layton, on the other hand is not too keen on an election I think. He could lose more seats as the left will try to oust Harper by moving to the Liberals. Mind you, Ekos pollster said that the Liberal Party is actually not taking a lot of NDP supporters. It's between the Conservatives and the Liberals that are moving about....except that more Liberal supporters move towards the Conservatives instead of the other way around.

Pundits are saying the Liberals are going to try to bring down the government possibly on Mar 21, the day before the bduget is announced. They'll try to come up with a non-confidence motion. The Liberals cannot let the budget be announced if they want to have an election....since the budget allegedly has good things for seniors, among other things. The Liberals cannot have themselves seen as voting against those goodies. Some say Layton won't go with the Liberals on this. It is expected that Layton will support Harper. What do you think?