By Stephen Gray
Hello from Loonie Land, where pregnancy has become a disease and the abortionist is a person to be honored.
A national newspaper headline asked, "Why doesn’t this man have the Order of..." Loonie Land? The man in question was Loonie Land’s foremost abortionist. The guy never quits - he is still snuffing out lives at "almost 80," years of age and gets paid by our tax dollars for doing it. Some people think the only order he should get is a restraining order.
Another article in the same paper by the same reporter tells us that in the abortionist’s waiting room: "The magazines are up to date as is the music..." the article goes on to say: "The clinic exudes warmth and friendliness." This surely gives credibility to the saying - you can kill people with kindness. The article also tells us the abortionist has "arranged for a masseuse to come in to treat the staff, gratis." Perhaps this could be called being soothed while the abortionist removes.
Anyways, to get back to the original question: Should this abortionist get the Order of Loonie Land? Why not? A union boss received the Order of Loonie Land and one of his claims to fame is that he solicited funds for an abortion clinic using union time and money. This is Loonie Land and we are consistent in our insanity and perversions. Anyone objecting should be reported to the "human rights" commission and charged with a "hate crime."
While we are on the subject of abortionists, you might like to know how profitable this abortion business is. An article in the same national newspaper says that one, "family physician, who was not identified, would have billed a total of $242,882 to terminate pregnancies in that year." (The year was 1998-1999). Could this be called sending a billing for doing a killing? And isn’t that a lovely Orwellian word - "terminate." Does this mean this "physician" is a terminator or an exterminator? Their language sounds like they are killing vermin instead of a baby. But hey, they have to make it sound nice to justify their actions. Who said pregnancy was not a disease?
In the western part of Loonie Land an editorial on abortion had the headline: "Legislation cannot solve the abortion impasse." We have legislation on murder, theft, incest and other crimes and that doesn’t stop these crimes being committed, but we still have legislation. Are these journalists for real? Does this mean murder, theft and incest should not be legislated against? We better ask these "informed" editorial writers of our main "newspaper."
The editorial also states: "Legislation on irreducibly moral matters is bound to falter and fail when it’s not supported by public consensus." We have legislation on taxation and how many of the public are asked or consulted to see if there is a "consensus." If you don’t pay your taxes, or evade your taxes, you get punished by the law. All our laws are based on "moral matters" or used to be until some judges started hallucinating and politicians lost their integrity. One would have thought that so called "investigative journalists" would know about moral matters; after all, journalism is supposed to be about the search for truth. Isn’t truth a moral matter? A person swears to tell the truth in court. Perhaps they don’t know what truth means anymore. Once a lie is perpetuated it has to be continued to save face and this is what is happening with abortion. Despite all the evidence and technology available, the media hide behind the word "choice," thus making fools and liars of themselves.
The editorial finishes with the lofty statement, "... when the public is divided over profound moral issues, the debate needs to take place in the public square, not in the House of Commons." Do these people realise what they are saying about "moral matters." Perhaps, we don’t need legislators or courts so let us decide all these "moral issues" in the public square of Loonie Land. Let the anarchy begin, or this being Loonie Land perhaps I should say let the anarchy continue.
Still, however, one should not be too hard on the ignorance and banalities of our so called "investigative journalists." Recently a pro- abortion hospital union’s head office was picketed by a group of people showing pictures of aborted babies and other atrocities. A reporter from Loonie Land’s national publicly funded T.V. station, the Collective Broadcasting Corporation(CBC) station showed up to interview the picketers but would not film the pictures of the babies killed as a result of abortions. When asked why not the reporter replied they "are too graphic" and the station wouldn’t show them. Who said journalism was about the "search for truth?" Yet this is the same T.V. station that will show all the horrors happening around the world and body parts of victims blown up after bombings. The media are complicit in the killing of the child in the womb by covering up this atrocity called "choice."
Despite all the evidence and technology available today where we can see the child in the womb, and operate on it, the big lie continues to be perpetrated. Truth has been aborted. Killing the child in the womb is the act that dare not speak its name. Instead we call the act "choice." Even when the child is born alive and left to die - or survives and is disabled for life as in the case of a child in B.C. - nobody is charged and the crime ignored. Most of the media today are shills for abortion and abortionists. These self proclaimed "news leaders" are a joke. So one should not be surprised when one of these so called "investigative journalists" is touting the country’s most outspoken abortionist for the Order of Loonie Land.
Stephen Gray
graysinfo@telus.net
website http://www.oocities.org/graysinfo
February 4, 2003.
Some info on the Author: Stephen Gray is a writer and researcher on various topics. He published a newsletter for 11 years detailing the misuse of trade union time and money.