Share

A very popular notion among conservative groups is that if they play according to the rules social liberals set; voting, lobbying, debating, discussions, the legal system, the separation of powers, the separation of Church and State, freedom of speech, freedom of religion etc; that they’ll get a fair shake at establishing socially conservative laws and rules because the majority of people throughout history have been conservative.

But what these extremely naive groups keep on forgetting, is that the rules were set by social liberals, not through the rules but through violence. Groups and people who consider themselves conservative, have forgotten that historically speaking, conservatives did not support republics and democracies over monarchies. Republicanism and democracy are firmly liberal concepts.

What about freedom of speech? Surely that has to be conservative? No. That is certainly a liberal value. Just as freedom of religion and the separation of Church and state. Conservative groups did fight hard to keep those ideologies from infecting the mainstream but alas, as we now know, that effort ended in failure.

And did the liberals establish such promises of freedom through the rules they’ve set? Of course not! Not a single democracy has been established via democratic elections, King Charles of England can tell you about how violent the installation of the separation of powers was, and Republicanism was established in France on the blood of its Monarch and many thousands more.

Queue the paradigm shift; and what was once considered bloody and revolutionary is now considered peaceful and conservative. But if freedom of religion and democracy and freedom of speech are now conservative values in our modern times, what would be their liberal counterparts?

Why anarchy, protests, and censorship of anything considered offensive to liberal sensibilities of course. This type of violence has always won the day, but today you have a conservative leadership not even willing to fight back. In fact many of them are so intimidated and frightened that they’ll be caught believing in something that was only acceptable a year ago, that they oftentimes side with their liberal counterparts, betraying their respective support bases. Once the base is gone; the battle is already lost.

Many of these pro-life groups are doing just that. They are fighting via rules that their opponents have set and are now completely ignoring and they are following leaders who are completely compromised.

Their own ideals would be considered novelties centuries ago, as most pro-lifers are modern day Pelagian heretics. Yet they expect God to help their cause, when their cause opposes God’s truth in some dogmatic areas. So it should come as no surprise that as reported in Life Site News, a pro-life leader is opposed to an abortion bill, while “calling on conservatives to defend free speech”.

“This is fundamentally a free speech issue,”

“As such, the proposed legislation strikes at the heart of our democracy, our western civilization. If we don’t have free speech, we are not a free people. Period.” (Jack Fonseca)

If we don’t have free speech we are not a free people? This guy is a pro-life leader? If he even believes in one ounce of Scripture, he would know and believe that it is Christ who’s the only means of true freedom, not freedom of speech. Today’s conservatives all worship these liberal creeds.

This is why ultimately the pro-lifers are going to lose. Fonseca’s words above demonstrate just how much faith and stock, conservative leaders today, put into these liberal institutions such as freedom of speech and democracy. These ideologies are what contributed greatly to abortion’s legalization. Now they are supposed to be the means by which abortion will be made illegal?

Even if it were possible and the majority of persons believe abortion is wrong and should be made illegal, the pro-lifers will still lose this fight. Nobody is playing the democracy game anymore. This is a dance so-called conservatives are having with themselves. While the feminist lobbyists are lining politicians’ pockets with money, ignoring the basis of “majority rules” by pitting it against their mainstream accepted version of human rights; conservatives are still out there peddling belief in the “democratic process” and the concept of ‘freedom of speech’, shocked when those very liberal ideologies, fail to act as a shield against relentless liberal attacks.

The pro abortion bill : “Introduced by Attorney General Yasir Naqvi on October 4, Bill 163, or the Protecting a Woman’s Right to Access Abortion Services Act, outlaws all pro-life activity, including sidewalk counselling, within 50 meters of Ontario’s eight abortion centres — a distance that can be increased to 150 meters on request.” (Life Site News)

And what’s the conservative reaction to all of this?

“Let me be very clear: I am pro-choice. That includes protecting women exercising their rights from intimidation or harassment,” (Patrick Brown Conservative Leader)

But what about democracy? What about our elected officials? Does Patrick Brown or the vast majority of so-called conservative politicians, care one iota what their conservative bases think? Despite the fact that his base most likely opposes abortion rights, Patrick Brown had no problem stating his belief in that very thing. The human right for women to choose, trumps the importance of satisfying a conservative base, that has a history of shifting more and more to the left over time.

It’s a matter of conviction really. Liberals have always had it…those who identify as conservative, have seldom had it. Politicians know that if they get caught on the wrong side of history, they’re done for. So why should they back proposals that are conservative now, like opposing pro-abortion bills, when they know that in a matter of 20 years or less, such policies will no longer be seen as mainstream conservative, but fringe and extreme? Losing an election is more than a risk they are willing to take.

In fact, based on a liberal commentator’s statement on this issue, the law-abiding, democracy loving, free-speech worshiping pro-life groups, are already being seen as extreme.

“In the weeks and months ahead, women seeking abortions in Ontario may continue to be harassed by protesters seeking to humiliate them,… They may be yelled at, personally insulted, accused of being murderers. They may find their paths toward clinics obstructed as gruesome images are waved in their faces. They may be spat at.”

(Adam Radwanski)

Of course Radwanski’s comments aren’t rooted in many facts at all. They are steeped in propaganda aimed at vilifying pro-life groups, with accusations that conservatives in the past would welcome, but now wouldn’t want to touch with a bean pole. (Paradigm shift remember) And that’s the point. Liberals aren’t playing by the rules. They are choosing the field of battle, armed with bayonets, while conservative groups hold ballot boxes in their hands decrying the illegality of it all.

“As a rule, pro-lifers at abortion facilities are peaceful and prayerful, Offering a woman a pamphlet is not an act of violence. Offering a woman information about the development of her baby in-utero that she may never have seen before is not assault,… Offering support and help to a woman who thinks the violence of abortion is her only option is not harassment, but a loving response to a woman in a difficult situation,”  Fonseca.

The problem Mr. Fonseca, is that no one is listening to your recitation of the rules of a democratic society. You’re having a one sided dialogue with an opponent, that is unified in its utter hatred of the truth, engaged in a fight that it is winning. And why are the Liberals winning this fight? Because they are the only ones fighting.


Share
2 thoughts on “Canadian Abortion Bill Exposes Weakness of Pro-Life Tactics”

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: