Pope to MPs ...

The Vatican's 12-page letter with its lengthy title, Considerations regarding proposals to give legal recognition to unions between homosexual persons, was quickly abbreviated to "Ban gay marriages: Pope" (Toronto Star, Aug. 1), "Church trying to bully politicians, gays say," (Globe & Mail), and "Vatican rips gay unions" (Sun).

It wasn't only the "gays" who claimed that the Church was trying to "bully politicians." Politicians and media adopted the same view. "They shouldn't be telling us what to do," stated MP Carolyn Parrish (Lib., Mississauga Centre); "I don't feel that what the Pope has to say about this has relevance to my functioning as an MP," said Carmen Provenzano (Lib., Sault Ste Marie); "I think the Pope should focus on addressing the issues of sexual abuse ... and leave this issue of homosexual marriage alone," opined Lib. MP Carolyn Bennett (St. Paul, Toronto).

Canada's leading print media adopted the same tone. Take, for example, the Toronto Star and the Globe & Mail, two of the largest and most consistent supporters of the so-called evolving morality which has led us to this latest outrage, the same-sex marriage concept, together with the idea that the traditional definition of marriage is "unconstitutional."

In "Church and state" (Aug. 2), the Star declares that "faith is a personal matter," and then adds, "not something to be codified in the law." The Pope may believe what he wants, the Star stated, adding, "but he has no business trying to thwart the recognition of gay marriages in Canada's secular law." That's as far as the reasoning of that editorial went.

The Globe's editorial "The Vatican's reach, the politician's duty" (Aug. 1) has the same odd nonsequiturs. It notes that already in January the Vatican "told the politicians they have a moral duty to fight efforts to redefine marriage to include same-sex couples." But, it goes on to say, in Canada "justice looks for guidance to the constitutional Charter of Rights and Freedoms." It then lashes out with the incredible observation: "The Vatican's insistence that politicians put their religion first in determining public policy on the question is beyond the pale. It is an unacceptable proposition outside a theocracy."

It's astonishing to realize that these writers and politicians are serious. They actually think that they have the right to influence and determine public policy but Catholics, Evangelicals, Jews, Muslims, and any other people of faith do not. I propose that Canadians take the following four steps.

1: Vote out of office all MPs who favour same-sex "marriage" or who refuse to vote against it. Let's get rid of them and their legislation. They have foregone the right to hold public office. Please note that the same bloc is preparing to vote for Bill C-250, adding "sexual orientation" to the Hate Crimes Act, thereby threatening with fines and imprisonment anyone in the country who dares to oppose the same-sex lifestyle. Again, almost certainly the same Liberal-NDP-Bloc-Quebecois group will vote for cloning, and for research on human embryos provided for in Bill C-13. Because Cabinet members, some 55 to 60 MPs including Parliamentary Assistants, will be required to support the government's legislation, Canadians should count on dropping all of them.

2: Use the "Notwithstanding" clause to overthrow the judicial rulings demanding same-sex "marriage" definitions. Don't pay attention to the media gurus who have already decided that this is impossible because Chretien and Martin won't have it. Globe columnist Jeffrey Simpson tells us that Canada is no longer a parliamentary democracy, but a "constitutional democracy" which is unchangeable ("Forget the preaching, gay marriage is a done deal," Aug. 2). Simpson is wrong in thinking that we have a constitutional democracy where all is well. We have, instead, a judicial oligarchy where everything is going awry.

Chantal Hebert, in her August 6 column for the Toronto Star, tells us that "overriding the Charter is a charade." Well, let's surprise her.

3: Launch the idea that the Charter either be amended or wiped out. Shocking, you say? Unheard of? Impossible?

Nonsense. Canada had no need of a Charter to begin with. We did without it for 120 years. This 1981 Trudeau-Chretien misdeed is undermining Parliament's supremacy. Unelected judges legislate for Canadians without accountability of any kind.

4: Call for an impeachment process of judges. But, you may say, we are not the United States, we are Canadians; it can't be done here. well, we had better get ready for it.

The courts have made a number of rulings based on false premises. With same-sex "marriage" they have promulgated equality for homosexual activists because supposedly homosexuals "are born that way." (See article "The same-sex marriage verdict," pp.11-15). The Supreme Court made that judgement in 1995 without discussion, without evidence, on the mere say-so of one judge. This can't go on. Arbitrary law-making is the death of Canada. We must stop it.

Better John Paul II and live, than Chretien-Cauchon--and die.