So he got axed by the tolerant,inclusive,socialist NDP. Nothing new here.Moving right along.

Thanks for posting this Kate. Justthinkin is correct in that this is top down machinations from Gary Doers' morally bankrupt cabal of socialist thugs. I'll pass this post along to some MSM journalists who may want to get this story out (Michael Coren in particular comes to mind).

I suspect that Dr. Reynolds is pro-life because, in all likelihood, he is a Christian. That might also put him at odds with a great deal of the practice of family medicine.

Anyone who doubts that professing Christians, often upholding excellence in their chosen professions, are not being persecuted by diversity-toting bigots in positions of authority had better think again and clean their glasses.

Essentially, practising Christian teachers are discouraged from sharing any of their views on either marriage or fertility (or anything at all), being expected to toe the pro-abortion, anything-goes-family-model line, and we've seen what goes on at universities and the CHRCs.

They came for the Christians and I didn't speak up because ... I wasn't a Christian.

Who's next?

I know that traditionally Canada is a judeo-christian nation, but how would you feel batb if your kids were being taught by a Muslim teacher, and frequently taught lessons found in the Koran? Same goes for a JW doctor...what if he continually refused or did not support blood transfusions?

Honestly, I don't know the circumstances of this case, so he may very well be being persecuted for invalid reasons, I'm just saying.

Anyone interested in conscience issues should check out this excellent site:
www.consciencelaws.org

bar_jebus,

The views on marriage and fertility that batb is referencing are not exclusive to Christians and the bible though.

Hey, bar_jebus, I have had a family doctor that was Muslim and another who was Sikh and another who was Hindu.

And yes, my daughter was counseled with humanist values from a couple of them. They weren't fired.

So, bar_jebus, what is the standard? Anything but Christian?

There's a second story in this that's just as disturbing: the med student denied their degree after they said that they would not perform or refer for abortions.

students are obligated to tell patients about all treatment options which fall within the medical standard of care

I wonder how far that goes. If that student had not said anything at school and then, after starting a practice, made it clear to patients that they will not perform or provide references for abortions, would the province shut them down? Would the university revoke the doctor's degree?

Yikes.

bar_jebus: I would not go to a doctor with whose views on important issues I disagreed. I have changed doctors before, for just this reason. But, they weren't fired, nor did I complain to anyone. I just left their practice and found another doctor. Doctors should have the same rights the rest of us have: freedom of religion and freedom of expression.

But Chairman Kanga and James make good points: Are doctors either to toe the secular-humanist line or be asked to leave their positions? That is, Christian doctors will be asked to quietly exit their university posts, but it's OK for others to keep their jobs if they have objections to abortion, for example, on moral, ethical or spiritual grounds, as long as they're not Christians--if they are, say, Muslim or Hindu or anything-but-Christian?

Because that's the way things seem to be going. Read one of the latest posts at Ezra Levant's blog: "It's OK for [a radical Muslim imam] to say gays should be "beheaded," Jews "spread corruption," Hindus must "be killed."

http://ezralevant.com/

University's have become nothing but Marxist pest holes. Liberal fascist run institutions with no room for any new or old ideas, except "progressive " statist ones. So much for free inquiry. There a discredit to science & scholarship. Once they gave up free analysis for absolutist materialism. All detachment was lost. No one even learns to think in a coherent manner in this rarified atmosphere of prejudice. Its emotion based values neutral hogwash.
I hear they screen nurses in them now for Pro-Life people, than oust the applicants of those who think life starts at conception.
Its why so much corruption has entered every field. Why life is so cheap. Ask Sarah Palin. She committed the modern unpardonable sin for Women. She gave birth to a in their minds (Death cultists utopians) “defective baby“. That was why so much vileness was directed her way. In the minds of these pigmy’s anyone who had a handicapped child on purpose, is deranged for not killing IT. The Universities only reflects the mindset of the elitists, anti-democratic faction now. No other view will be tolerated. Particularly Jewish or Christian ideals. To them there the enemy, always has been. Always will be. Like the Religion of war, people are cheap by the dozen. Only the philosopher Kings (themselves) are worthy.
It’s a sad state of affirms. It makes people shy away from real knowledge. Most with any brains, see what they teach as nonsense, if not out right bigotry disguised as schooling.
JMO

there's always the separate school system..........

Basically, what we are moving towards an informal "Christians Need not Apply" society. Exemptions are made for every other group to allow for diversity and inclusiveness. Meanwhile, Canada's largest religious group is being actively harassed.

The reasons given for both the student and professor being removed are thin. Do the powers-that-be really think women are so dim-witted that their decision to have an abortion will be blocked by a doctor not giving them a referral? Of course not because that would be a sexist attitude. They just want to make sure that the proper people with proper ideas are in the proper positions. You know...so that progressives can claim that there's consensus, therefore the issue is settled and it can no longer be questioned. No pro-life groups allowed on campus, weed out pro-life medical staff in hospitals, remove pro-life profs in education, drag any stragglers to the HRC. Voila....complete acquiescence and conformity in the field.

I find it mind boggling that this getting 'permission to publish a letter' garbage is still with us today. And in the medical profession yet!

I mean it was over 20 years ago when I wrote a anti-CWB letter to the newspaper and was then quickly visited by the NFU thugs telling me to give my future letters to them first, so that they could check and change them so as to promote the CWB as our western saviour.

But, doctors? Today?
This can't be true, can it?

>>I wonder how far that goes. If that student had not said anything at school and then, after starting a practice, made it clear to patients that they will not perform or provide references for abortions, would the province shut them down? Would the university revoke the doctor's degree?

Yikes.

As a medical student I feel I have some input here:

No one can take your MD away unless you are guilty of gross negligence or are somehow unfit to practice (criminal, substance abuse, or psychiatric reasons).

CMA guidelines allow for physicians to refuse to perform procedures on religious or moral reasons as long as the standard of care for your patient is not compromised. In the case of abortion, a physician can refuse to perform an abortion BUT the physician must inform the patient of the option of abortion and at the very minimum refer the patient to someone who will arrange for an abortion referral should they desire one.

I'm not as happy with that as I could be, but at least there is a provision there for moral objections that still allows for a standard of care to be upheld in a case where religious beliefs (i.e. opposition to giving blood transfusions) would interfere with a patients health.

The Black Rob had a good post on this a few weeks ago.

http://blackrod.blogspot.com/2008/12/axe-drops-on-dr-larry-reynolds-real.html

oops... I mean Rod not Rob

Houston,there is a problem.You may or may not agree that doctors should be forced to make abortions but Tommy Douglas ,the great socialist icon,was a great believer in Eugenics,therefor ALL doctors will be forced to KILL the mentaly handicaped and the old and infirm paving the way to a better world for all! Where have we heard that before?Eisenhaur said take pictures,lots of pictures,because someday some son of a bitch will say that it didnt happen.

In the case of the student, religion is no defense. If we ask a student "what is 2+2" and he comes back with "my invisible friend told me that it's 57", it doesn't matter how strongly the student believes his answer to be correct - it's still wrong. You can't go around awarding marks and diplomas based on religious beliefs. If we adopted that tactic, we'd still be teaching that the world is flat.

In the case of the doc, the people who fired him seem to have their heads wedged firmly up their rectums. His opinions are his own, as are his publications; they have no business firing him because of his opinions unless those opinions interfere with his work. On the other hand, judging by the way these cases often get misrepresented (for example, in the movie "Expelled") I think I'll wait for a bit more information before condemning anyone.

I just responded to a Carleton fund-raising email - again - by telling them - again - that I consider it a sick institution; that I consider the anti-white male vote by the student council an accurate reflection of the views of the faculty, students and staff; that the belated, half-hearted and self-serving apology was hypocritical and deceitful; and, that I would not live long enough to see Carleton correct itself.

Alex, it does not look the student was failed because incorrect answers or skills. He was failed because of incorrect ideas. (from the linked article)

"In 2003, a student was failed by the University of Manitoba School of Medicine. The reason? He informed his Obstetrics and Gynecology instructors he would refuse to perform or refer for any abortive procedure. "

I agree the student should not have the rights of a physician. It is not their beliefs that bother me as much as the dereliction of the patient. You don't have to perform an abortion but you do owe a referral with the refusal. It is about discipline and I want some standards kept.

This is beyond stupid, I was followingg this story on the black rod and I still cannot believe it.

This university needs all public funding taken away from it, and the administration fired.

Of course, this is outrageous . . . something observant Christians—who are, by definition, not in favour of either abortion or the abortion license—have known for some time, while the rest of our “tolerant, diverse” society was sleeping.

I used to be very vocal about issues, such as abortion. My views were non PC, but expressed intelligently and reasonably. I used to be able to speak up politically (incorrectly) in the public square and still keep my job as a teacher and not be hounded by the PC jackals. Written “Equity”—for everyone but people like me—policies ended my freedom of speech. (I’m not free if I’ll be persecuted for stating my opinions in public.)

Even my friends, who are “more tolerant and diverse” in their views than I am, are quite willing to go along with this “dark underbelly” of Canadian life: they generally prefer not to have their attention directed to the kind of persecution I’d be liable to if I continued to speak out publically. Like the Germans, who lived just down the road and who said they had no idea about the concentration camps, most Canadians, including, as I’ve said, many friends of mine, prefer to be “in the dark” about the totalitarianism of virtually all of our institutions when it comes to moral issues. (I feel truly disenfranchised and have lost an important aspect of my past life, where I was quite engaged in the public debate—now all but lost—on important legal and ethical issues. On the other hand, my political opponents are free to spout their views all the time, everywhere, and usually paid for by whatever institution they might be involved with. Some equality!)

Yes, this “hear no evil, see no evil” ruse annoys me. Yes, it puts stress on my relationships. And, yes, I wonder if some of these people are really my friends at all. In terms of “Whatsoever you do [or not, as the case may be] to the least of these, my brothers, you do to me”, I’d have to say these “friends” of mine do not treat me as a friend, so far as the political persecution I would surely suffer if I spoke out: they’d rather not hear about it. They—and most of Canadian society—are like those who passed by on the other side of the road, leaving the Samaritan bleeding and on the ground. Re the appalling workplace persecution of an exemplary professional like Dr. Larry Reynolds: excellence and competence have nothing to do with it. (I’ll bet his political opponents are anything but exemplary professionally: and to be involved in character assassination and persecution, definitely shows that, morally, they’re, complete pygmies. But, in the present dispensation, they win anyway.)

Kate and Ezra Levant, neither of them observant Christians, are not passing by on the other side. Many thanks and blessings! Re the coalition and Liberal, left-wing skulduggery, the Canadian sleeping giant—ordinary Canadians—is beginning to stir. Maybe Christians have reason to be more hopeful about our prospects in the public square in this country . . .

Meanwhile, God bless Larry Reynolds and may the Lord have mercy on his persecutors.

Boycot the Universiity of Manitoba.

A toady institution of low repute and poor ethics.

batb at December 17, 2008 4:47 PM

I am not a Christian, but I am pro-life. Why? I was adopted...

I've let Roy Green know. Hopefully he'll do a segment on this story.

"It is about discipline and I want some standards kept."

That is a wonderful and idealistic concept...completely incompatible with the current medical system. Many people cannot get referrals for procedures because of lack of family doctors and rationing. The doors to medical school need to be flung as wide open as possible not restricted to students who hold toe the progressive line. That failed student may have made an excellent doctor in every other way.

Besides, do you really think that a women in this day and age would not be able to access abortion services because of her doctor's religious conviction? Help is merely a phone call away through the many government services set up to help women. A doctors refusal has minimal impact when compared the other health care restrictions in our mismanaged system.

Abortion is one of those areas that should be treated delicately with understanding and sensitively, more concepts alien to progressives and bureaucrats. It is should be about balancing rights.

My husband, an anaesthetist, has been noticing the push for abortion rumbling through academic medicine for a few years now. He is worried that he will no longer be able to opt out of giving an anesthetic for an abortion. If this occurs, he'll leave medicine.

As far as the idea that a doctor does not need to perform an abortion but has a duty to refer, would this also apply to active euthanasia? This is the new direction our elites will take us. Would you, as a doctor, give a referral to another physician who does active euthanasia if you know the family of the patient is pressuring your patient die? How is this different from a women wanting an abortion when you know it's really the boyfriend who is pressuring her? Would you still refer the patient for an abortion?

Would you, as a patient, want to have a family physician who you know could or would refer you to be euthanized, even if it's just when you ask? Even when you are suffering greatly? Really truly? How could you trust the physician to do the best for you, under this scenario, for any and all circumstances???

JMHO

PS. I wonder how this is going to play out among the many wonderful conservative Jewish and Mennonite physicians in Manitoba.

lynnh:

"Alex, it does not look the student was failed because incorrect answers or skills. He was failed because of incorrect ideas."

That's right. An incorrect idea which directly relates to the field in which he was studying. It doesn't matter how good the rest of his marks were - he failed in a critical area. It's no different than, say, a geology student getting great marks in class, and then telling his teachers that he thinks the earth is 6,000 years old. Sorry, you fail!

lookout:

"I am not a Christian, but I am pro-life. Why? I was adopted"

Heh. That's a bit like saying:

"I'm not a Christian, but I am anti-masturbation. Why? Because I didn't end up as a stain in a sock."

or

"I'm in favour of rape, because my father was a rapist."

Sorry man, but how you were conceived or born plays no part in deciding the rights of others. Saying you want the state to criminalize abortions is no different than saying you want the state to forcefully keep men from masturbating. Either way you're using the power of the state to infringe on the freedoms of others.

Now, if all you want to do is urge women to not have abortions, that's fine, I wish you the best of luck. As long as you're not forcing your will on others, I have no problem with you or your beliefs. In fact, I'd be more than happy to encourage and support your efforts. I think that we DO need to discourage abortion, and educate people about the alternatives. However, once we've provided that information and made a good argument, we still need to leave the choice up to the women. Nobody has a right to make that choice for them.

bar_jebus says: "I know that traditionally Canada is a judeo-christian nation, but how would you feel batb if your kids were being taught by a Muslim teacher, and frequently taught lessons found in the Koran? Same goes for a JW doctor...what if he continually refused or did not support blood transfusions?"

As it happens, my physical therapist IS a Muslim. He's from Egypt, and he's one of the very best PTs I've ever seen. Being a PT myself, that's praise indeed.

We had a -very- interesting discussion on Monday this week about Islam. He considers Egypt to be a n occupied country, like Holland under the Nazis. Occupied and tyrannized by the Wahabists, bought and paid for by the House of Saud. Seems they're agitating to get rid of Egypt's historical artifacts because they aren't "Islamic" enough to suit them. Also they don't treat Christians very well. He was turning red just talking about it. P1ssed him right off.

I'd let -that- guy teach kids all day long.

Jehova's Witnesses who become doctors conform to the standard of care for their specialty, or they don't get to practice. Any doctor who refused to -give- a transfusion for religious reasons would probably be lucky to stay out of jail. It doesn't happen.

Witnesses and Mormons have been know to refuse to take treatment. I have never heard of a case where one refused to give treatment.

You see, bar, stereotyping people according to their racial/religious/social group is a Lefty thing. Taking each person as an individual, equal to all others before the law and possessing dignity and freedom, this is a Conservative thing. You wouldn't understand.

Choose life... your mother did.

Alex, you seem to have a language processing problem—or two. I'm against abortion, but not because I was adopted: I wasn't. (Check it out, my boy.)

Then you say, “Sorry man [sic], but how you were conceived or born plays no part in deciding the rights of others”. Did you stop to think about that before you said it? Do you understand the word, “irony”? (Do you have a functioning brain?)

Fact: despite your total ignorance, “how you were conceived” has EVERYTHING to do with both abortion AND the rights of others: those human beings conceived as a result of recreational sex—now an epidemic—are much more likely to have their rights ignored entirely, before being aborted (at public expense, up to the moment of birth: Canada has NO laws to protect unborn human beings) than those human beings who are conceived, let’s say, in a committed marriage.

Hey, “man”, why not think before you compose rubbish and push the Post button?

RW, all the best to you.

SHAME SHAME SHAME I THHOW MY SHOES

"Alex, you seem to have a language processing problem"

Naw, just looked at the wrong signature line. I guess you don't understand how quotation marks work, otherwise you would have realized that I was responding to someone else.

"Fact: ... those human beings ... are much more likely to have their rights ignored entirely, before being aborted"

Apparently you also don't understand what the phrase "human beings" means. And you seem to think that the words "fact" and "opinion" are interchangeable. Quite frankly, I'm starting to worry about the "functioning" of your brain.

Using your ... "logic" ... we could likewise state something along the lines of:

FACT: Those human beings conceived as a result of masturbation are much more likely to have their rights ignored entirely, before being aborted through the use of a gym-sock, than those human beings who are conceived, let’s say, in a committed marriage.

I know that you think Magic-Man doesn't like abortions, but that's no reason to go around making idiotic statements and calling them facts.

Glad to see that the abortion/pro-life issue has been de-polarized and replaced with respectful, thoughtful and absolutely fretty free discussion.

: )

Cheers!

Leto

Utter garbage, Alex.

Have fun with yourself.

And here I thought the point of the post and the article it refers to was the politicization of the University and the health care directorate.

Oh ....... wait a minute!

It's just the usual suspects confusing their presumptions with reality.

http://www.stvincentmedicalcenter.com/services/TransfusionFreeServices/Pages/default.aspx

Just remember this fact: if you are getting 'common practice' medicine in Canada, you are probably 2 advances away from the best methods/care available.

As for forcing doctors to do things against their conscience, I suggest firing them immediately. At the same time change the archaic Canadian laws so that they can practice outside of the state system and that people can purchase health insurance.

That way people who don't want anything to do with the state system from both ends aren't forced to.

Derek

Universities do NOT function as democracies, but as very poorly run businesses. What will make a difference is if you send a letter to the university president informing him that you will not send your children to a narrow-minded and academically suspect, explaining why. The time scale for change is about 5 years.

Perhaps one day Alex will get to stand before Magic-Man and give even more interesting details of his world view.

I hope to get a chance to sit on that seminar.

And perhaps one day you'll stand before Santa Claus, and beg not to be buried in coal.

Seriously, how pathetically ignorant do you have to be in order to make such an argument? Did you drop out of school in grade 5? Or are you just trolling for attention? Do you REALLY think that threatening me with your invisible friend is going to have any effect? And how do you justify that kind of threat? You're effectively running a "protection" racket:

"Well, see ... I know this 'God' guy, see ... he's a real nice guy. Very generous like. Takes real good care of his friends. But you don't wanna make him mad. Anyway, this sure is a nice soul you got here ... be a shame if anything were to, say, 'happen' to it ..."

At least when the Mafia threatens you, they don't insult your intelligence in the process. In comparison, you and your incompetent friends want me to believe that an invisible part of me which somehow lives forever will be eternally tormented by some guy whom nobody's ever seen if I don't give you money and sink to my knees in worship of some other magical invisible guy whom nobody has ever seen. How anyone falls for that racket is beyond me. I thought the Nigerian banker scheme was bad, until I really sat down and thought about religion. You guys make them look like friggin' geniuses in comparison.

RW: "I am not a Christian, but I am pro-life. Why? I was adopted..."

It makes sense that you are pro-life. I was not assuming that all pro-life individuals are Christians, simply that Dr. Reynolds is, in all likelihood, a Christian.

(I imagine that if he were pro-life because he was adopted, he might not have had his job terminated by the U. of M.)

Ezekiel 13:11
The Lord takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked....

and neither should anyone else.

In Manitoba, if you talk to RHAs bureaucrats, the health care system would be better off without doctors. Ask people in Virden.

Someone should do some more digging to find out more details about the medical student who was denied his MD because of his personal views. My medical student days are almost 20 years in the past, but we were given a clear choice in ob/gyn rotations: either you would participate in abortions or you wouldn't. I declined and had no problems as a result. My internship was at a Catholic hospital where no abortions were performed.

Now I refer women for abortions but make sure I let them know all of their options including continuing on with the pregnancy. I also inform them of potential psychiatric consequences of having an abortion. Most of the women I refer are women who shouldn't be having children in the first place.

As far as the case of Dr. Reynolds goes, this is just part of the out of control political correctness that takes place in universities. As is the case anywhere else, people who are productive physicians/researchers have absolutely no interest in medical/university politics whereas those individuals who aren't particularly brilliant or productive get into positions of power. Haven't come up with a solution to this problem yet but perhaps a genetically engineered virus might solve this problem at some future time.

Well said Lookout, both of your comments made my heart ache for you as I, too have been in the situation you now find yourself in - horrible to have 'friends' who don't want to be seen with you because you are a 'loose canon' (in my case!).

I second your Blessings for all the people you mentioned and I will add another Blessing for you. If it helps to know , I am on your side and I am cheering for the same team as you are - here in the Yukon.

I can remember Maternity wards where nurses and Doctors celebrated the birth of each new baby with tenderness, joy and wonderment. My baby brother was born in such a ward and I will never forget the snow white starched nurse who took me by the hand and let me over to the nursery to hold the tiny perfect hand of my new little brother. She was beaming with joy for my family; her smile was ear to ear when she tenderly touched the top of my brother's head and gently smoothed his fine hair.

I do not know how Dr.s and nurses survive in the abortion business - it would send me insane.

It must have some effect on the consciences of pro abortion practitioners, else why would they be so hostile to a Dr. with pro life ideas? A Dr., like Dr. Reynolds; a with such expertise in his field? I borders on the fanatical (and approaches irrational Paranoia) to consider the radical steps those professionals took to discredit one of their own who had committed no crime.

Thanks for posting this Kate.

Well-said, Jema 54, and how tragic for Canada that principled people like lookout, willing to engage in debate in the public square, are effectively shut up and shut down by the politically correct powers that be.

G*d knows, we need alternative views to those of life-denying--in the broadest sense of the word--political correctniks. Everywhere they ply their trade, which is everywhere, we see the disastrous lowering of standards and the resulting mayhem.

Doctors are entitled to the same human rights as all other Canadians. When the state/institution insists that a doctor engage in practices which go against his/her conscience, the state/institution is asking too much and is contributing to a virtual gulag.

Canada has a lot of gulags. The U. of Manitoba has just become the latest.

One more thing: You can't give rights to one group by taking away the rights of another group. That's a fool's game and extremely dangerous.

They try to stop this tiny little voice inside of their heads that tells them that killing unborn babies is wrong so they abandon their religion and everything they were taught as children to believe in, to no avail. In an act of desperation they pin Order of Canada on mass murderer Dr. Henry Morgentaler hoping that this act will finally make this tiny little voice in a back of their heads shut up. All of their efforts are in vain so now they try instead to kill everybody that dares to repeat the same message out loud.

lol

This is exactly why I'm waiting until more details come out :) You people are than happy to misrepresent the words and actions of others, as long as it helps you further your cause. As such, any rational individual will immediately be distrustful of anything you say.

And Karol? I just gotta ask: what colour is the sky on your world? Either you're living on an entirely different plane, or you're so far disconnected from reality that you really have no clue what's going on around you.

Here's a hint: if you stop projecting your own beliefs on everyone around you - especially those who explicitly tell you that they disagree - you'll be much closer to understanding the real world. You seem to think that everyone in the world sees the issue exactly the way that you do, but all these EEEEEVIL "liberals" just want to kill babies and destroy souls, so they ignore what they know to be Good and Righteous in order to Do The Work Of Satan. You are, in short, a moron. There's no little voice in my head telling me that killing unborn babies is wrong because I don't see them as babies, and I don't see it as killing. I don't know how I can make this any clearer to you. You can try and argue about what constitutes human life, and maybe even have a productive discussion about it, but as long as you insist on projecting your own thoughts and feelings on everyone else you'll never come close to an understanding of the real issues.

Tell you what, Alex:

I'll support the right to abort a fetus if all laws regarding child support are removed from the books. If a guy has no say if a child is killed or brought into the world, he shouldn't be forced to pay for the woman's decision.

It IS her body, after all. She made the choice.

Jema you nailed it.

First off I am agnostic, and I can't bring myself to inflict my views on what a woman should do with her body. If a woman doesn't want a baby, she will do what she does regardless of what I think. I know that makes me a hypocrite because I believe a fetus is a human, but I can't square this issue in my mind.

That being said, I think Jema has gotten to the root of the issue. If I'm a pro-choice doctor who commits murder/abortions I might resent doctors who do not have the burden of conscience for their continued inhumane actions. What better way to alleviate my suffering than to inflict it on others. After all misery loves company.

I believe that everyone knows abortion is killing a baby; but, out of convenience people rationalize the action. I don't prescribe to right and wrong, or 10 commandments and such. I believe we do what we do, and we shouldn't do it if we can't hold our heads up and say what we are doing. What I'm saying is we as Canadians should hold our heads up high and say "We murder babies!" because that is what we do. If this doesn't sit well with us then I think we should reconsider our collective position on this, but to simply rationalize and lie to ourselves just makes us look foolish.JMO

Posted by: Yukon Gold at December 18, 2008 10:51 AM

I've got no problem with that. Canada's child support and divorce laws are completely sexist, and I agree that they need an overhaul. It's unlikely to happen any time soon though.

"I believe we do what we do, and we shouldn't do it if we can't hold our heads up and say what we are doing."

I agree completely! So, why don't you be the first to set a good example? Stop saying "I'm pro-life". Everyone knows that's not what you really mean. Stand up proudly, and shout it out:

"I OPPRESS WOMEN!"

You shouldn't be doing it if you can't hold your head up and say what you're doing.

I'm with Indiana. Although I am not religious, I believe that life starts at conception. It may not be sentient or independent life but it is most definitely on the journey to being a thinking, living, breathing person. I have had enough experience with pregnancy and ultrasounds to discard the idea that the fetus is no more than a clump of cells that can be discarded like fingernail clippings.

In that respect I am firmly anti-abortion. OTOH, the thought of giving the state the power over life decisions far scarier. Particularity when politicians are increasingly influenced by environmentalists and budget conscious bureaucrats. Both of whom seem to be in favor of limiting life spans in the name of Gaia and health care rationing.

These types of decisions should be left up to individuals. Free choice to women who have been given all the facts regarding abortion (no sugar-coating). Free choice to doctors and medical students to refuse to be participants in the ending of a human life.

I know that traditionally Canada is a judeo-christian nation, but how would you feel batb if your kids were being taught by a Muslim teacher, and frequently taught lessons found in the Koran?

bar_jebus LOL in my Childrens school they do send home arabic text. We all know damn well no one will be fired for it either.

Jema 54, I'm glad to know that we're on the same team and that you're cheering. Many thanks for that and for your blessings, which are, well, a blessing!

Re life starting at conception: I believe it’s a misconception to say that this is a “belief”. That human life starts at the moment of conception is, in fact, a fact!

Think of all the barrier methods of birth control: all designed to keep the ovum and sperm apart. Now, why would that be, and just what starts growing and developing at that moment in time, who needs to be “terminated”?

Conversely, for those who want to have a baby and can’t, what goes on in those petri dishes anyway? Isn’t it the union of an ovum and a sperm? Those who deny that the dead—because it used to be alive—“product of an abortion” is anything other than a human being are delusional.

I appreciate the honesty of the posters here, who are willing to call a spade a spade.

Alex

I support a woman's right to choose life or murder, so I suppose I am a hypocrite because I wouldn't support a woman's right to murder you.

OT (as always)

Alex, it is agnostics like yourself that are an embarrassment to the rest of us. It is people like you who want to post signs next to other peoples religious displays belittling their beliefs for no other reason other than the ability to do so. I can't help but think that agnostics such as yourselves are so uncomfortable with their own beliefs, that you can not stand seeing others and the serenity they get from religion( as ridiculous as that may seem to you and I). You are simply a "PLAYA HATER" who likes bringing down to others. Nothing you have said has been constructive at all, the only thing you offer is insults (like the sign in Washington). Furthermore, it is your complete lack of understanding of what faith is that makes your statements ignorant and makes you sound foolish to most people, but of course you don't know how silly you sound because ignorance is bliss.

Remember Jodie Foster in "Contact" and the lessons her character learned about faith, and try to see the positives that religions brings people of faith. Surely you wouldn't want to deprive people of the positive benefits, just because you think you are right! Ask yourself "What are my motives when I speak so callously and I presumes so much?".

Do you even know what the word "agnostic" means?

You're right in one respect - I DO hate to see religious displays. For instance, the religious display which I got to watch on live TV on 9/11/2001 - that one was particularly annoying. I suppose I could have just shrugged and said "well, they're just finding happiness in their own religious way". Maybe that's what "agnostics" like you did. However, when I see people committing atrocities, oppressing others, and generally opposing the improvement of the human race all due to a bronze-age bit of superstition which should have died out centuries ago, I try to do something about it.

You seem to think that opposing ignorance and irrationality is an evil thing; I think that doing nothing to stop it is far, far worse.

As for this bit of nonsense:

"surely you wouldn't want to deprive people of the positive benefits, just because you think you are right"

I have yet to see any "positive benefits" of religion which are not achievable through rational means. Moreover, even if there were any, they'd be dwarfed by the negative aspects. I have no interest in depriving people of anything; all I ask is that they base their beliefs on evidence and reason, and that they stop trying to bully everyone who disagrees with them. As I pointed out earlier - most of them are nothing more than protection rackets. "Give us your money or your soul's gonna get it".

I don't care if your belief is Chrstianity, Mormonism, Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Communism, or Shintoism - as long as you're not trying to force your views on others, I've got no issue with you. I might laugh in your face when you start making stupid comments based on your beliefs, but that's about it. The moment you start affecting my life, though, then we've got a problem. Unfortunately, that's exactly what most organized religions want to do, although some are much worse than others. I'm generally willing to side with Christians for the simple reason that we have a much greater common foe, but that doesn't mean I have to turn a blind eye to their antics, either.

Anyway, I've posted way more on this thread than I should have, so I'm going to stop now. You seem like an intelligent guy, even if your ideas about "faith" and "agnosticism" are RTFO. If you want to continue the discussion, feel free to e-mail me: dileas - at - gmail - dot - com. Otherwise, at least go read up on the definitions of "agnosticism", "atheism", and "antitheism". If you're going to discuss being non-religious, it would be good if you at least knew the difference between them.

Sorry Alex but in my world being 100% sure of anything, even KNOWING there is no god is irrational. I don't believe in god but there is a possibility I could be wrong, so I'm not an atheist. Not being able to see the + faith brings people is your own shortcoming, and blaming religion for the actions of people is simply scapegoating. The deed is the deed, regardless of the motivator.

Perhaps I can put this into terms you'll better understand. "Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering" Yoda

I sense much anger in you!

This doctors “dismissal” is another example of the outrageous example of the left controlling our society from the halls of academia.

I personally believe in “pro-choice” which isn’t to say “pro-abortion” but what I am against is the control of our societies by these left winged nuts and their agenda’s. Same goes for the far right winged nuts if they ever had a say.

The reasons for pro-choice is not at all a religious one. Our overpopulating planet simply can’t sustain the current population growth, our resources and infrastructure can’t cope for one. The fact that the majority of children who would otherwise have been aborted by choice by their mothers will be born into poverty and abusive situations is another. Compounding the global overpopulation and dysfunctional family situations only leads to more crime, and more unwanted babies in the longer run. This should be the decision of the mothers and hers alone to bare, and nature will take its balanced course.

To take a religious stance and force mothers to birth their unwanted babies whether their decisions was made due to economics, rape, defective gene’s or what have you - is one of force and totalitarianism. There seems to be no room for sympathy towards the mother, her mental status and well being in the religious realm.

If an all seeing, all knowing god wanted that child to be born, it would be born. If an all loving god allowed a soul to be consummated from nothing or somewhere, he would receive it back to that place from whence it came. Birthed or not.

Posted by: Alex at December 18, 2008 1:59 PM>

“I'm generally willing to side with Christians for the simple reason that we have a much greater common foe”

Great point and I would have to agree!

I also consider myself an Agnostic. The difference to me is that I don’t dismiss outright that there may be a greater being/energy/creator or whatever you chose to call it. We simply just don’t know. And although I do not believe in any religious claims to that knowledge by man, I do see an inherent value in religion “to keep the flocks in line” and to serve as a community function outside of government. Of course I disagree 100% with the abuse of power within most religions, using guilt and fear to control the masses and fill the pockets. Islam on the other hand I take as an archaic death cult in its infancy, unlike Christianity that has smoothed out the edges of its bloody tribal roots.

With the compounding growth of Islam in the world and our western societies, we need to be vigilant and aware of this looming danger. The most probable way to defend our society is to fight fire with fire, which means to hold onto the Judeo Christian values that formulate our society.

Alex, I really dont like saying things like this, but, you're a bully.
You're bullying all of the pro-lifers here just because they dont share your opinion. We get it, you dont believe that the human heartbeat has the right to keep beating once it has started (The heartbeat begins beating in the first month after conception, doctors are allowed to stop it up until birth). You seem to compare people who are anti-abortion to people who are anti-masturbation, but that's apples and oranges. A fetus has the genetic material of both parents, and is in a stage of rapid growth and development. Without the mother it would not survive, but it requires no further genetic "add-ons" to become a full human, it already IS a human. Sperm and Eggs both require the addition of further genetic material in order to form a full life, Sperm are nothing but HALF of a man's DNA, and would not be able to grow into a person without the addition of further material. Eggs are a finite source within a woman, but every month one disappears from the body, it is a NATURAL process, the egg is not alive, it is half a cell. Please go look up the percentage of boys aborted compared to girls aborted every year (the number is staggering, lots more girls than boys die every year) and then look up the number of ethnic people compared to caucasians (again, you might be surprised). Its eugenics, and its cruel and discriminatory.
I cant remember which president said it, but: All the people in favor of abortion have already been born.
Strange how that works out.

Along with being rude to the pro-lifers, you're bullying all of the Christians on here just because you dont believe in God. Its not their fault you have no faith, and you have no right to belittle them for having any. Faith and religion does bring a lot of good to the world, people with faith are twice as likely to donate to a good cause, do charity work, volunteer. People of faith tend to be happier with their lives (I know in my case its because I am never alone, and there's always someone there who is willing to listen if I am upset) and strangely enough, people with faith have this annoying tendency to be TOLERANT. They may not like something, but they will often turn the other cheek and tolerate the discrimination of their own beliefs because they are taught to be good, to be kind and to be tolerant of others.

When only one set of views is tolerated, its not tolerance, its tyranny. Learn some damn tolerance!

Those of us in circumstances disquieting similar to Dr. Reynold's situation sometimes take refuge in letting others speak for us. These authors have said it better than I could anyway...

Margaret Sommerville in the Calgary Herald, Sept 18, 2008:
http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/story.html?id=3794616b-c515-4a87-84a2-6773c0f2c6cb&p=1

"In Canada, pro-choice advocates are not content with having the freedom to act according to their values; they want to make others act likewise. And they want their beliefs publicly affirmed. These people claim freedom of values for themselves, but refuse to respect others' freedom. That's why they will not tolerate a respect-for-freedom-of-conscience exception. No matter what our values or views, we should all be concerned by such totalitarianism."

Sam Solomon, in the National Review of Medicine, January 15, 2008:
http://www.nationalreviewofmedicine.com/issue/special_sections/2008/patients_practice/5_abortion_rights_2.html

"[There was] an article in the CMAJ in 2006 that claimed, incorrectly, that physicians would be committing malpractice by refusing to refer patients for abortions. Several months after the article, and subsequent angry letters, appeared in print, Dr Jeff Blackmer, the director of the CMA Office of Ethics, had to issue a clarification to make clear that physicians have no obligation to refer patients."

Posted by: Irene Swain at December 18, 2008 7:01 PM>

I’m sure after assessing your strong views that I’m making a BIG mistake by responding to your comment. But what the hell it’s Thur evening.
You stated:
“When only one set of views is tolerated, its not tolerance, its tyranny. Learn some damn tolerance!”
I’m sorry but I think I missed something there.

You also stated:
“Its eugenics, and its cruel and discriminatory.”
Actually it’s called “cultural reality”! Which is a term more people need to understand more clearly when accepting other cultures at face value. I presume you are referring to the indigenous cultures of India and Bangladesh (not withstanding) which pays homage to males and aborts females as worthless fodder? If so then you are also referring to absolutely hopelessly impoverished societies with almost 2 billion mostly worthless human beings by their account.

In other words – “Caucasians “as you infer are not responsible or accountable for the fact that these cultures choose to kill their unborn in favor of whatever tribal and economic belief system they prescribe to. If you are “white” you do not need to feel guilty for this belief system. It has been this way for thousands of years, long before we advanced to the bleeding heart consciousness of the planet.
For every one baby that dies or is aborted, there will be ten or more born on the planet every day. The world is now suffering a global humanitarian crisis that will sweep all of its modern day problems away if we do not get the unsustainable population growth under control.

More to the point the focus should be on rights and freedoms, including the woman’s right to choose and be accounted for in our western countries. That was a precious gift hard won by the women of our societies not that long ago, and those rights are in an extremely fragile state considering WHO their letting in the doors these days.

Knight99

Obviously you don't know what agnostic means either. I suggest you email Alex for "education".

That being said I believe you are wrong wrt human over population. With current technology we can actually feed 50 billion people, food shortages are because of politics. There is no food shortage or resource shortage. The human population will continue to grow to about 20billion people, at that time the population will start to shrink because of the large # of old people. Working in the potash industry these numbers are important for projecting future demand for our products. These numbers are regularly discussed in quarterly meetings because we feel our industry is vital to humanity. I know intuitively it feels like humans will keep growing and growing but that just isn't the case.

Indiana Homez>

“With current technology we can actually feed 50 billion people”.

Well I’m not a food expert so I won’t question where you got that number, but I will doubt it. The issue of overpopulation is not a food problem alone. The main problem is fresh water from which food is grown and in a finite supply. Every one ton of grain produced requires 10 tons of fresh water to grow and that supply is diminishing.

I do find your potash industry calculations of 20 billion people unnerving. With the state we're in with 6.5B - we will be in big doodo by then me thinks.

Indy: 50 billion people? Ok. Forget what I said about you being an intelligent guy.

Knight: I know I said earlier I wouldn't comment on this article any more, but after seeing your comment I had to fire off one more. I think you're wrong about the overpopulation problem (although you're certainly a lot closer than Homey over there) and I know you're wrong about how you classify yourself as far as religion goes. The word "agnostic" says nothing about what your beliefs are - it's only a commentary on methodology. If I ask you whether the sky is blue, you can say you're agnostic but all you're really saying is that you're not 100% sure. That does nothing to address the issue of what you think or believe. They're completely separate questions.

When talking about religion, there are only 4 general categories which you could fall into: Theist, Deist, Atheist, and Antitheist. I'll explain them real quick:

Theist - You believe in a religion, usually involving an active, personal god(s).
Deist - You don't subscribe to religion, but believe in some sort of supernatural "higher power", usually one which doesn't take an active role in the universe.
Atheist - You do not believe in religion, or any sort of supernatural "higher power".
Antitheist - You believe that no gods exist.

Out of the four categories, you would (probably) be an Atheist, and I would be an Antitheist. However, the word "agnostic" can also be applied to any one of those categories. So you could be an Agnostic Atheist, while I'd be an Agnostic Antitheist, and some religious fellow could be an Agnostic Theist. That's because agnosticism simply means admitting that you accept some uncertainty when it comes to your beliefs. The only people whom you would NOT apply that word to are the religious fundies who insist that they KNOW god exists, or to the unthinking antitheists who insist that they know for certain that no god exists.

That's why, generally, the word "agnostic" is meaningless. ANY thinking human being should be agnostic when it comes to answering ANY question. Eventually, though, no matter how much uncertainty exists, you have to come to a conclusion as to what you believe. That's why I can say that, while I admit there is a very small probability that some kind of god exists, I am an antitheist. I could call myself an agnostic antitheist, but in a way that's almost redundant.

As for you, since you are not a Theist, and you are (apparently) not a Deist, you are by default an Atheist. You need to realize that Atheism is not the opposite of Theism, but simply the absence of it. Just like amorality is not the opposite of morality, but simply the absence of it. If you do not believe in a god of any type, you are an Atheist. Period, full stop. Whether you admit to a degree of uncertainty is a totally different question.

Indiana suggested (however sarcastically) that you e-mail me, and I'd like to extend that invitation personally. You definitely seem like someone I could have a productive discussion with. My e-mail addresses is listed a dozen comments back - if you're interested in further conversation you can reach me there. Take care!

Apologies for the long delay in replying to you comment. I just happened to relook back on this particular thread.

I suppose thanks for the clarification is in order, although you need to understand I don’t give much thought or credence to labeling myself as this or that when it comes to religious matters. The issue of belief or religion or lack thereof is a personal matter in my opinion and I only make comments about it when it serves another purpose - to get my point across. I normally distain remarks about religion on SDA because it’s guaranteed to draw out the “god squad” along with the lefty trolls whom each takes their fundamentalist stances and ruins any kind of legitimate discussions.

My interests in these blogs are of concrete concerns which will affect our societies and children’s welfare in the future. Not mine per say, because I’m still quite ok living in an open relatively prosperous and crime free society where people can breath and enjoy the fruits and labors of our gifted ancestors. I feel that our carefree, well organized and civil lifestyle is under attack and coveted on many fronts. Not to chastise the “have not’s” in the world but to chastise the anarchist and fundamentalists that have proven nothing of consequence in the history of mankind or within the borders of their countries and societies.

It’s my belief that it’s our duty to educate our young to the pearls of the world environmentally, economically, politically and culturally. The culture of North America and what’s remaining of indigenous Europe are the last bastions of real human societal development and the attainment of greatness through knowledge and science. All other cultures are simply none productive tribal sects or great imitators as with Asia (not to be unkind to Asia it’s a lovely place and people, but all that is modern Asia today is a western imitation or design).

As we weaken our societies with third world labor, and third world religions we achieve the socialist’s dream of third world equality. Anyway not to rant too long about the insanity of losing our place in the world, I simply wanted to explain that whether I’m labeled a deist, atheist or agnostic by myself or yourself, it is a moot issue and unimportant to me. I have my spiritual beliefs or ideas and keep them to myself where I believe they belong. I do believe that I will neither go to hell or have 72 virgins when I eventually die, and that of course is the one thing we can all bank on.