• Skip to main content
  • Skip to footer

April Reign

Speak your mind even if your voice shakes

Debra

The Harper/Ignatieff Coalition

01/29/2009 by Debra

In a move that showed Canadians Liberals have their best interest at heart, newly minted Liberal leader Ignarieff voted down the Harper budget. Citing lack of initiatives to protect or create jobs, complete disregard for the women of Canada, and a deficit which will take decades to pay yet resolves nothing…… Oh wait no.. that’s not what happened at all.

Sure the budget wasn’t worth the cost of the paper it was printed on. Sure women received absolutely nothing. Sure ordinary working class Canadians were once again told to stuff it in favour of an estimated 3 billion to paid to those who not only can afford to keep their homes but renovate them too, sure there were reports of infrastructure payments –oh did we mention they got the idea from a spam scam? ya– you put up the money first and then we’ll give you riches…sure the budget held all this and more but Ignatieff voted for it anyway.

OOOOO but there were caveats. Yep there were. Big special important ones too. Like the Cons gotta keep Canadians informed about where their money is being spent and gotta check in and keep the parliament informed…uh pssssst Iggy…isn’t that how a democratically elected government is supposed to perform anyway?

What was the point in the Liberals electing appointing a new leader?

Filed Under: Politics Tagged With: budget, Canada, conservatives, Harper, Ignatieff, Liberals, Politics

Harper Still Ill Informed & Not a Leader

01/23/2009 by Debra

child_soldier

If anyone still needed proof of Harper’s lack of understanding of the realities of war, disregard for human rights and general inability to empathize with those of us who are not robots, Harper has just provided that proof.

“My understanding of international law is, to be a child soldier, you have to be in an army,” he said in the pre-taped interview.

Well obviously Mr. Harper’s understanding of international law is sorely lacking.

The international Coalition to Stop the Use of Child Soldiers and UNICEF have broader definitions than Harper does of what it means to be a child soldier.

The coalition acknowledges on its website there is no “precise definition.”

The international group, however, considers a child soldier to be anyone under 18 “who is a member of, or attached to, government armed forces or any other regular or irregular armed force or armed political group, whether or not an armed conflict exists.”

UNICEF also defines a child soldier as anyone under 18 “who is part of any kind of regular or irregular armed force or armed group in any capacity,” including cooks, porters, messengers, and minors forced into marriage or recruited for forced sexual purposes.

The disregard that Harper shows for this young man who has already served 7 years for a crime he has not even been proven to have committed is shameful and chilling and should serve as a warning to us all.

Source

Filed Under: Politics Tagged With: child soldier, Guantanamo Bay, Harper, khadr

Blog for Choice 2009

01/22/2009 by Debra

Fear often causes people who can only see black and white to further insulate themselves against those things they cannot fathom.

The fearful wrap themselves in cloaks of rules and theologies which offer no variation, brook no deviation and punish those who see beyond the blinders of a forced faith.

So it is with those who wish to enforce pregnancy at any cost. The concept of people, women in particular, living a life of personal autonomy and freedom is foreign to them and therefore scary. There are those who feel that their religion speaks this to them, and indeed many pulpits preach this. And there are those who see power as their god given right and therefore use those blinded by faith to further their power grab.

This scenario has played out politically across America for some years now with many in the political sphere echoing the sentiments of the extremists for political gain. After all they will do as they are told and if told from the pulpit to go vote for a certain person because they will support and enact their religious tenets they will show up and vote. A boon to any politicos career.

The incrementalist approach to enacting fundamentalist religious ideals as laws by which all must live started with the issue of abortion. As any good advertiser knows it is easier to sell something that resonates on an emotional level, can be reduced down to misleading sound bites and visuals and/or that can be framed as a moral absolute. Abortion fit the bill perfectly.

Women’s rights are a battle not yet won in America and in the grand scheme of things abortion rights are relatively new and certainly not affirmed in any constitutional way. As long as there are people willing to see human rights as a subject for debate there will be those ready and willing to take them away.

The fight to remove women’s rights started with abortion. Debating limits, reasons, whether or not a woman has actually thought about hence the waiting periods and forced ultrasounds and the move to declare eggs persons.

When two persons inhabit the same body whose rights prevail? If a foetus is a person endowed with the rights and responsibilities of a person and the state judges that a woman cannot have an abortion to save her life and subsequently dies and somehow the foetus is saved is the foetus guilty of manslaughter? Is the state an accessory to the fact? Or is the taking of women’s lives somehow ok? Apparently in the view of the extremists women are empty vessels for men to fill with seed and if that vessel breaks is easily replaced with another. The reality is that abortion is but the first right they want to revoke. Contraception is already on the hit list. And no they do not support programs to help support the children resulting nor even to pay for the maternity bills.

Filed Under: abortion Tagged With: abortion, blog for choice, freedom

Fatherhood

01/08/2009 by Debra

Father:

1. A male person whose sperm unites with an egg, resulting in the conception of a child.
2. A man who adopts a child.
3. A man who raises a child.

Note that regardless of whether an individuals penis was involved the act of raising a child and acting in a “parental” capacity bestows fatherhood. Within a marriage any offspring is automatically considered to be the child of the husband regardless of actual paternity.

My mother told me the story of a woman in their town who had an affair while her husband was off in the war. She became pregnant as a result. When he returned there was no drama and he loved and raised the child as his own. His explanation was that everyone was in crisis and if his wife needed comfort she had a right to it. And because this child issued from the woman he loved it was every bit as much his child. If only such a sensible man could be cloned.

Turning from that to the exact opposite. A post at thescottross wherein he bemoans a man having to continue to make child support payments for what as it turns out are not his biological children. He titles the post this way;
Man Has To Pay Child Support For Someone Else’s Kids

the Globe & Mail leads with
Man who didn’t father twins must pay child support

both are incorrect.

They are not someone else’s kids. He parented them and had a relationship with them he was the only father the now teens have ever known. They are in fact, in deed, and in law his children.

The G&M is also wrong. He did father the children. The only thing he didn’t do is donate the sperm.

Certainly marital infidelity (something far more men engage in) is a serious blow to a relationship, however for this man to turn his back on these girls who did nothing to him is beyond shameful. For others to back him in his abuse of these children is contemptible.

and this bit of drivel is beyond the pale, one only hopes the young women in question do not ever see such putrid scrawlings;

The Grumpy Voter said…

This is just one more in a string of rulings over the past ten years that ensure children receive child support, regardless of the circumstances. While I disagree with the ruling, it’s important to remember the courts look at these issues with priority on “the best interests of the child” as well as the status quo: in short, while what mom did was probably despicable, the status quo is that this man has been paying support for a number of years so to have him suddenly stop paying support would upset the status quo thereby having a negative impact on the best interests of the children. Very simply: courts in Canada RARELY upset the status quo regardless of whether it is child support or custody and access… the status-quo is presumed to be in the best interest of the children and that’s that.

My advice to young men: wrap it up. Wrap it up twice. Don’t shack up with a woman who has kids from a previous relationship because if you act in the place of a parent, you’re liable for child support. Don’t enter into a commonlaw relationship and have kids… ever. You will have no rights as a father. Finally, if you want to get married, do not marry her if she refuses to sign a prenuptial agreement… it’s just not worth the risk.

the Judge’s words

The judge noted that Mr. Cornelio wondered at the time of his separation whether a man named Tony with whom his wife had had an affair might be the father of the children.

“It was not until access was interrupted and Ms. Cornelio commenced proceedings seeking increased child support that the respondent began pursuing this issue,” the judge remarked.

In any event, she said that it would be wrong for the children to suffer for events over which they had no control.

“Mr. Cornelio was the only father the twins knew during the course of the marriage,” Judge van Rensburg said. “The relationship that developed from the time of their birth was the natural relationship between a parent and his children.

“The fact of that relationship – even if it has now become strained – is sufficient to require Mr. Cornelio to continue to contribute toward the children’s material needs.”

Child support, Judge van Rensburg said, is the right of a child even if a parent behaves poorly, “whether it be delay in pursuing support, an attempt to contract out of support, or the failure to disclose an extramarital affair that may have led to the conception of the child.”

Filed Under: Blogging Tagged With: child support, fatherhood, men

Blame it on Hamas

01/07/2009 by Debra

With apologies to Kris Kristofferson

Harper’s up in Ottawa he’s really in stew
Canadians in Gaza what’s he gonna do?
But then he hears a whisper into his tin robotic ear
Lets just blame it Hamas

Blame it on Hamas, blame it on Hamas
You’ll feel so much better, knowing you don’t stand alone
Start the accusation, tell the bleeding nation
Get it off your shoulders, blame it on Hamas

Conservatives won’t take the blame, won’t take responsibility
Lies are cheap and easy, the truth it don’t come free
It’s not our fault if lives are lost
We’ll just blame it on Hamas

Blame it on Hamas, blame it on Hamas
You’ll feel so much better, knowing you don’t stand alone
Start the accusation, tell the bleeding nation
Get it off your shoulders, blame it on Hamas

So while civilians in Gaza are blown to little bits
Conservatives wax arrogantly but they don’t give a shit
They just sit there useless immune to all the cries
We’ll just blame it on Hamas

Blame it on Hamas, blame it on Hamas
You’ll feel so much better, knowing you don’t stand alone
Start the accusation, tell the bleeding nation
Get it off your shoulders, blame it on Hamas

See POGGE for the news story

Here is the original song

Filed Under: Politics Tagged With: conservatives, Gaza, Hamas, Harper, Politics, war

Genocide

01/06/2009 by Debra

From The Hamilton Spectator

But no militant casualties were seen yesterday by an Associated Press reporter at Shifa Hospital, the Gaza Strip’s largest. Instead, the hospital was overwhelmed with civilians. Bodies were two to a morgue drawer, and the wounded were being treated in hallways because beds were full.

Gaza health officials reported more than 550 Palestinians dead and about 2,500 wounded since Israel began the campaign 10 days ago, including 200 civilians.

Diplomats and European leaders raced around the region in search of a ceasefire, but with Palestinian rocket fire continuing, Israel said it won’t stop its crippling assault until “peace and tranquility” are achieved in southern Israeli towns in the line of fire.

You are not going to get peace with millions of armed men. The chariot of peace cannot advance over a road littered with cannon. ~David Lloyd George

Filed Under: war Tagged With: civilain deaths, Gaza, genocide, Israel, war

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 14
  • Page 15
  • Page 16
  • Page 17
  • Page 18
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 93
  • Go to Next Page »

Footer

Community

  • MoS on Snowy Afternoon Walking With My Dog
  • anonymous on Snowy Afternoon Walking With My Dog
  • Alison on Psstt… Hey you! Ya You Poking Your Nose In Other People’s Wombs.. Come Here
  • Debra on Facebook and Progressive Values
  • anymouse on Facebook and Progressive Values

WordPress Design,
Consultation & Training

Fat Cat Designs

Copyright © 2026 | Privacy Policy | Log in | Home

 

Loading Comments...
 

    We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.OkNoRead more
    Revoke Consent