Sex-hibition and free abortion advice at federal government museum!

Here’s my letter to Tony Clement, President of the Treasury Board (tony.clement@parl.gc.ca), with a c.c. to the Prime Minister (pm@pm.gc.ca). I suggest our readers point out the abortion connection to the Prime Minister. That’ll get his attention ;-) You can also write to the Heritage Minister, James Moore (james.moore@pch.gc.ca)

Hon. Tony Clement
President of the Treasury Board

cc. Prime Minister Stephen Harper

Dear Tony,

I appreciate the efforts you’re making to cut unnecessary spending and balance the budget. However, I’m greatly distressed that taxpayer money is being used to fund a sex-hibition at Ottawa’s Museum of Science and Technology. The official name is “Sex: A Tell-all Exhibition”, but the content is very disturbing.

The “Erecto-matic” display contains a felt dissection of part of a limp penis. Press a button and the penis becomes erect. Is this how our hard-earned taxes should be employed?

Then there’s a display with a picture of two girls around the age of 13 pressed together naked, looking at the camera as if the viewer has just discovered them showering. Most normal Canadians would call this child porn. Do you want to be bankrolling this crap?

Then there’s the abortion issue. There are two audio stations where you can press a button to receive an answer from a health professional to a series of prepared questions. One question asks what to do if you’re pregnant with an unwanted child. The woman simply explains that in Quebec you can have an abortion without parental consent at the age of 14. She does not mention adoption. Since when is the federal government in the business of counseling abortions? I thought the Prime Minister didn’t want to talk about abortion?

Tony, even in the best of times this spending would be an outrage.  But at a time when the government is cutting more than $5 billion in annual spending and laying off thousands of public servants, this spending is just plain insulting.

As you know, museums will be flooded with kids on Canada Day, as admission is free and parents have the day off. I trust you can put an end to this disgrace before then.

Sincerely,

Original article: 

Sex-hibition and free abortion advice at federal government museum!

Four out of ten students could be turned into ‘alcoholics’ next year. Is that fair?

Source article: 

Four out of ten students could be turned into ‘alcoholics’ next year. Is that fair?

Until You Die

Kat of the Crescat has a crush on a Young Fogey.

She observes that she is 35 and asks if she isn’t too old for crushes. The answer, of course, is no.

The incomparable Nancy Mitford once wrote a letter (actually she wrote so many letters that it would take me hours to find it and copy it here) about being interviewed by a lovely young lady. Nancy had won international fame as the author of In Pursuit of Love and, as an aristocratic Englishwoman who lived in Paris and dressed beautifully, was a heroine to younger literary ladies. (They did not know, as Nancy did not know, that her lover would up and marry her rival, the beast.)

This lovely young lady asked all the professional questions and then, as you or I certainly would do, got to the important, personal stuff and shyly asked at what age feelings of unrequited love went away. “Never,” said the almost-elderly Miss Mitford. The lovely young lady was bowled away by this remark.

This reminds me of when I was about 30 and terribly fit and the nurse examining me told me I had the heart of a fourteen year old.

“Tell me about it,” I said.

And this also reminds me of my wonderful Canadian grandmother. My American grandmother never struck me as ever having been a girly-girl; food and family quarrels were much more her interests. But my Canadian grandmother was very chic and outgoing, hung out with a gang of friends, did her nails, had her hair done, and went away on holiday to a Muskoka resort, where she drank cocktails. She had been enormously in love with my grandfather, and although she was pursued by the occasional widower, she had no interest in marrying again.

However, when I was grown-up and divorced (and invalidated, as they say in Poland, not that my Protestant granny could ever get her head around that), and my grandmother was quite elderly, I discovered that this lack of interest in marrying again was not because Grandma had packed in her appreciation of the caffeine in the cappuccino of life. Not at all.

Grandma–my mother will kill me for telling this story again–Grandma on two or maybe three occasions panicked in the middle of the night over some pain or other and summoned an ambulance. The ambulance would arrive promptly and young male paramedics would rush to my grandmother’s aid.

“And I said, ‘Well, you’re all very handsome’,” related Grandma after one such episode.

“MOTHER,” said my mother in an awful voice, and Grandma giggled.

“Why not?” she said. “And it all gave me quite a thrill.”

“It all cost two hundred and fifty dollars,” growled my mother.

“What?” cried my Scottish-Canadian grandmother. “Two hundred and fifty dollars?” She meditated on this and sniffed. “Huh. Some thrill.”

Eventually Grandma “temporarily” moved from her house to the local nursing home for round-the-clock care. Instead of young paramedics, the place abounded with young orderlies, and even–as my Grandmother related with a twinkle–a handsome young masseur. I think the idea of therapeutic massage would have been absolutely scandalous to my grandmother when she was younger, but as seemed to be one of the very few perks life offered the 80+ set, she enjoyed it.

It delights me to no end that as an eighty-year old my grandmother had the freedom and confidence to flirt with the paramedics loading her onto an ambulance. I doubt, however, that she ever actually lost her heart to a paramedic or masseur, so maybe the pains of arthritis, etc., do cancel out the pains of unrequited love.

But it would appear that the feminine appreciation of masculine youth and beauty does not necessarily flee with the approach of old age. Thank heavens for that.

Originally posted here: 

Until You Die

Catechism – Contemplative Prayer – 2715

Catechism – Contemplative Prayer – 2715

Contemplation is a gaze of faith, fixed on Jesus. “I look at him and he looks at me”: this is what a certain peasant of Ars in the time of his holy curé used to say while praying before the tabernacle. This focus on Jesus is a renunciation of self. His gaze purifies our heart; the light of the countenance of Jesus illumines the eyes of our heart and teaches us to see everything in the light of his truth and his compassion for all men. Contemplation also turns its gaze on the mysteries of the life of Christ. Thus it learns the “interior knowledge of our Lord,” the more to love him and follow him.

Subscribe To Site:

Jump to original:  

Catechism – Contemplative Prayer – 2715

COLUMN: Duhaime – English Canada grows tired of Quebec


Thrill is gone in Canadian marriage

by Eric Duhaime

Are English Canadians on the verge of kicking Quebec out of the Confederation?

The person responsible for the National Post opinion editorial must have been flabbergasted at readers’ responses to this issue in the last few days. More than 60% of the paper’s respondents said it was time to let Quebec go.

Even if the survey has no scientific grounds and covers a very small sample, the results show the malaise that currently exists in the country. While the separatist option is becoming less popular in Quebec, it surprisingly seems to be gaining popularity in the rest of Canada.

There might never be a referendum in Canada asking voters if they want Quebec to go, but in the current context there won’t be another love-in like the one organized in Montreal in 1995 to keep Quebec in at all costs.

Although we live in the same house, we certainly don’t sleep in the same room anymore. Our romantic days are long gone. Quebec and the rest of Canada have grown apart. Young Quebecers have no appetite for constitutional quarrels, although they define themselves more and more as Quebecois and less and less as Canadians. They have even invented the word “decanadianization.”

Conversely, English-Canadians are becoming more and more fed up with paying for Quebec, which receives more than half the money given through the so-called equalization program, the equivalent of $8 billion a year.

The solution might not be to ask Quebec to become an independent nation but to become less dependent on its neighbours and more fiscally autonomous. To calm English Canada down, the equalization formula — which will be reviewed before 2014 anyway — could be modernized.

Canada has evolved over the years. The need for interprovincial welfare is not as necessary as it used to be. The principle of redistribution is part of our Constitution but could focus exclusively on funding very essential social programs, which wouldn’t include $7-a-day daycare or a fully subsidized year of parental leave after the birth of each child.

On the other hand, to appease Quebec, the federal government needs to give it as much autonomy as possible. Stephen Harper has been very good at not exacerbating the tensions between the two solitudes. His decentralist approach makes the slow estrangement less painful.

Quebecers do not like radical changes. Our revolution half a century ago was “quiet.”

Will our separation from Canada also be “quiet?” Or do we simply need some distance so we can better figure out our true feelings?

We’ll see.

Anyway, the real question for now should be: Is there an alternative? The federal Liberals’ attempt to centralize the federation was a fiasco. It almost led to the breakup of the country 17 years ago and gave us a bankrupt welfare state.

We should salute this new refusal by English-Canadians to compete with the separatists to buy Quebecers’ votes.

If Canada is to survive, it needs to come from our willingness to stay together. Period.

See original - 

COLUMN: Duhaime – English Canada grows tired of Quebec