Welcome to The Bridgehead!

Jonathon Van Maren

A bridgehead is defined as “a strong position secured by an army inside enemy territory from which to advance or attack.” In today’s culture wars, a bridgehead of truth and common sense is exactly what we need. As Ronald Reagan once said, “When you’re outnumbered and surrounded and someone yells ‘charge,’ any way you’re facing you’ll find a target.”The Bridgehead Radio Program does just that, bringing you cutting edge news, interviews, and insights from the frontlines of the culture wars, and engaging in a sweeping discussion on human rights. Featuring renowned authors, commentators, politicians, intellectuals, historical figures, and more, The Bridgehead talks truth and common sense in a culture where it is badly needed. Featuring conversations with everyone from Peter Hitchens, Mark Steyn, Joel C. Rosenberg, and Gavin McInnes to Rwandan genocide survivor Immaculee Illibagiza, Holocaust survivor and Anne Frank’s step-sister Eva Schloss, and Nazi-hunter Efraim Zuroff, Bridgehead host Jonathon Van Maren takes a hard look at where our culture is and where we need to go.

Jonathon Van Maren is a popular speaker and writer who has been published in The National Post, The Times of Israel, The Jewish Independent, The Hamilton Spectator, LifeSiteNews and elsewhere, and has been quoted and interviewed by many prominent national publications as well as a wide variety of television and radio shows.


Read more

The 40-day Overcome Porn Challenge

By Jonathon Van Maren

Whenever I give presentations on pornography—which is quite frequently—the number one service and resource centre that I always recommend is Covenant Eyes. The team at Covenant Eyes is the tip of the spear in the war against pornography, and the work they do is simply phenomenal. Recently, they launched another major initiative—the Overcome Porn Challenge—and I spoke with Corporate Communications Specialist Dan Armstrong about it.

What is the Overcome Porn Challenge?

Overcome Porn is a 40-day journey for anyone who wants to “run from” his or her struggle with pornography. The Challenge is available:

  1. As an app for iPhone (it’s $2.99 on the App Store) https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/overcome-porn-40-day-challenge/id1068236871?mt=8
  2.  Free as an email for 40 consecutive days (https://learn.covenanteyes.com/porn-free-challenge/
  3. Free as a 40-day devotional through the popular YouVersion Bible App https://www.bible.com/reading-plans/4165-overcome-porn-the-40-day-challenge

What is the strategy behind it?

The Challenge uses 2 Timothy 2:22 as a foundation to build out what we mean by “run from,” “run to,” and “run with,” which are keys to freedom used throughout the Challenge. We encourage men and women to “run from” youthful passions, “run to” a God who loves each of us relentlessly, and “run with” trusted friends who can hold us accountable.

What sort of results have you been seeing?

One of the best stories we’ve seen involves a father who was stuck in a rut of regularly consuming online pornography. He found the Challenge and he found himself hooked to a new, daily routine – finding God through the daily encouragement he received from the email version of the content. Everything about his life changed, including his relationship with his children (he shared profound and emotional details about how God redeemed his fatherhood). Numerically, we see an average of 5,100 people subscribing to the Challenge through the Bible app and over 1,000 completions every month. 

How would you recommend this to those struggling with porn?

Even among Christians, porn is the norm. Recent surveys have shown that nearly two out of three Christian men admit to looking at porn at least once a month. For many, it’s a lot more than that. Around 15 percent of Christian women said they struggled with porn at least monthly too. This is the case across denominations, socio-economic groups, and geographic boundaries.

You can find one version of this Challenge here.

Read more

Candidate for Woodstock city council previously assaulted a peaceful pro-life activist

By Jonathon Van Maren

On November 15, 2017, at the corner of Dundas and Wilson in the City of Woodstock, a woman aggressively approached individuals peacefully sharing a pro-life message. Volunteer Craig Van Manen described her as “yelling at me to give her my sign” after which “she proceeded to slap eggs against it.”

In the presence of at least one witness, Van Manen states, she “then grabbed my sign and jostled with me for a moment over it before letting go. I held my ground calmly and firmly. I tried to start a conversation with her to no avail. She walked back to her car yelling that she would bring the matter to the mayor. As Wilma, a fellow member of Oxford Against Abortion, legally crossed the street to film the incident on her phone, the woman stepped around the corner again (coming back from her car) to throw an egg at us and missed.”

This woman’s name is Kate Leatherbarrow, and she is now running for Woodstock City Council. The day after the incident, she posted on Facebook that when she saw the individuals sharing their message “something in me broke and I have taken action.” She failed to mention that the “action(s)” she took would be properly categorized under criminal law as assault, assault with a weapon, and attempted theft. The incident was reported to police, who stated that they planned to warn Ms. Leatherbarrow in relation to the incident.

Ms. Leatherbarrow had choices. She could have instead engaged in civil debate or decided to also peacefully share her views on the public street. Instead, she premeditatively and intentionally committed physical violence against those who hold and share a different view from her own.

With the rising rates of violence against those who share a pro-life message in Canada, a person who has previously assaulted individuals just because she disagrees with their message is not a viable political candidate. Instead, those who fill political office should respect fundamental freedoms and support the right to civil debate. This is foundational to work as a public servant. In order for a public servant to be fit for office, they should be capable of responding reasonably to those with whom they disagree, and they should have the temperament that restrains them from criminal acts motivated by their opinion. Voters should reject Ms. Leatherbarrow on October 22.

Read more

The victim-blaming of Canada’s abortion activists

By Jonathon Van Maren

You would think that condemning violence against women in any circumstances would be an easy thing to do. But for abortion activists, it turns out that this is not the case.

Most of you will have seen the viral videos of violence by abortion supporters against peaceful pro-life activists—most of them women and girls—in Canada. The videos racked up so many views that even mainstream media outlets began to cover the incidents—although Canada’s state broadcaster, the CBC, refused to be distracted from their progressive agenda by noting the escalating assaults on peaceful pro-life women.

Canada’s abortion activists, however, were eager to victim-blame. Joyce Arthur of the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada has previously blamed peaceful pro-lifers for their owns assaults by stating that people were “provoked” into attacking them—as if abortion supporters are simply incapable of containing their rage at being presented with a point of view that differs from their own. Plenty of people seem excited to advocate violence, and I’ve seen the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada’s Twitter page “like” many of those comments.

Nora Loreto, one of Canada’s more unhinged progressive bloggers (she last gained attention for noting that the reason people cared so deeply about the Humboldt Bronco players who died in a tragic bus crash was their “whiteness” and “maleness”) weighed in on the abortion supporter round-house kicking a pro-life woman on Twitter, first accusing Mary Claire Bissonnette of “yelling”—which the video proves was not the case—and then said that Bissonnette was asking for it.

“Yes, I am blaming her for provoking someone into attacking her,” Loreto tweeted angrily. “Correct. I have zero use for these shitty gonzo tactics that make you guys all lose your mind. What these goons want the state to do to women is a million times worse.” In other words, if you are a woman who disagrees with Loreto and her fellow abortion fanatics, your rights mean nothing to them. Women should not be assaulted—unless they are women who disagree with abortion activists. At that point–go for it.

Fern Hill, the pseudonym used by a Toronto abortion activist, also promptly weighed in, tweeting out: “Blaming the victim is not always wrong. Discuss.” In response to my friend Katie Somer getting assaulted at Ryerson University by an abortion activist wielding a metal clamp, Hill stated: “This is deliberate provocation. Antis know they’ll get this reaction. And they carefully record it…This is on them.”

It is interesting to note that Ms. Hill has absolutely no faith whatsoever in the ability of abortion supporters to restrain themselves from physically attacking those they disagree with. As a matter of fact, pro-life activists do outreach in order to have discussions with pro-choice people, and we have thousands of them—with many of these conversations ending with abortion supporters changing their minds and becoming pro-life.

But to disagree with an abortion activist, apparently, is to invite assault—they’ll support women’s rights, even if it means beating up women.


For anyone interested, my book on The Culture War, which analyzes the journey our culture has taken from the way it was to the way it is and examines the Sexual Revolution, hook-up culture, the rise of the porn plague, abortion, commodity culture, euthanasia, and the gay rights movement, is available for sale here.

Read more

These viral videos are using satire to destroy abortion activists’ favorite arguments

By Jonathon Van Maren

October 18, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – It is rare that a new pro-life organization emerges that does something utterly unique, but that is precisely what Laura Klassen and Choice42 have done. In the past several months, they have released a series of viral videos that have taken the Internet by storm, with Klassen and her now signature pink wig playfully poking fun at popular pro-choice arguments—and racking up millions of views and copycat videos in a wide range of different languages.

Their now famous “Magical Birth Canal” video has over one million views on their Facebook page alone.

Klassen first became aware of what she calls “the horror of abortion” when she was quite young. “I saw a graphic abortion image on the street,” she told me by email.

“That image always stuck with me. I started volunteering at my local pregnancy resource centre when I was in university. It was there that I realized the huge potential for reaching out to abortion-minded women online and so I started Choice42.”

The result was a massive online hub containing every pregnancy resource centre in the country, a one-stop shop for whatever a woman might need in crisis.

And then came the videos.

“Our #JustSaying series was created to challenge the abortion status quo by addressing various pro-choice arguments,” Klassen explained. “Usually a certain pro-choice argument will be making the rounds on social media, and then a script starts brewing. We’ve had to build some pretty random props—you can’t buy a giant sparkly birth canal on Amazon, go figure—and those take some time. We’ve spent a lot of time gathering costumes for our next video, which we’ll be filming soon! We usually take a half-day to film a video with a small crew and then we do the editing ourselves.”

The videos have triggered massive reactions right across the spectrum—especially because Klassen has a knack for poking the pro-choice activist arguments in a way that drives them crazy.

“The Magical Birth Canal” cleverly exposed a fundamental abortion apologetic as ridiculous—the idea that your physical location has anything to do with your humanity or your value. “No Uterus, No Opinion” (which features Klassen explaining to me why I can’t have an opinion on an issue of human rights because I am a man) highlighted how bizarre it is to say that you can’t have an opinion on an injustice unless you’ve directly experienced it yourself. And if there is one thing abortion activists cannot stand, it is being made fun of.

“Abortion supporters are quite offended by our work,” Klassen noted. “We receive a lot of hate mail and threats. The comments on our videos from people who don’t agree with them are usually just insults with no real argument. We have opened a lot of eyes though…especially with the ‘Magical Birth Canal’ as even many abortion supporters did not realize that you don’t gain your human rights until you are fully born.”

Success for women in the pro-life movement always comes with a backlash: Klassen puts up with some of the most repulsive and misogynist online hate that I’ve seen in a long time.

Klassen’s latest video tackles the lazy slander that pro-lifers only care about babies until they’re born, and features her and a masked colleague breaking into a “fake clinic”—the moniker given to crisis pregnancy centres by abortion activists—and filling it with thousands of dollars worth of free diapers.

“The idea for our latest video came because we wanted to do a big ‘pro-love’ gesture,” she explained. “The atmosphere here in Canada regarding the abortion issue is very tense right now with all of the violence against pro-lifers. We felt it would be a good time to do something really positive. We bought $2500 worth of diapers and did a reverse robbery at a Pregnancy Resource Centre. We ‘broke in’ to the centre and filled it with all of the diapers. We were addressing the myth that, ‘pro-lifers only care up until the point the baby is born’ which couldn’t be further from the truth. We also wanted to bring more awareness to the Pregnancy Resource Centres and all that they offer for women and their families for YEARS after the birth.”

Many more videos are being planned—and not just the hilarious parody videos Klassen has become famous for. Choice42 has put out riveting and heartbreaking stories of women who regret their abortions, and beautiful stories of women who chose life in spite of horrific circumstances. It is a powerful one-two punch of real-life stories and the clever popping of pro-choice myths—an online pro-life juggernaut that fills a unique role in the movement. Until now, there has been no group doing work quite like this—and it is tremendously effective.


Read more

The Australian province of Queensland has voted to legalize abortion up until 22 weeks

By Jonathon Van Maren

In one fell swoop, the state parliament of the Australian province of Queensland has both legalized abortion up until the point of viability as well as destroyed conscience rights for dissenting medical professionals. From The Guardian:

Abortion will become legal in Queensland, after the state’s parliament voted to support new legislation and erase a 119-year-old “morality” section of the state’s criminal code. Loud cheers in the legislative assembly chamber at 7.42pm on Wednesday brought to an end a 50-year struggle by women’s groups in a state once notorious for its conservatism.

Queensland has debated abortion several times since the 1970s, when women’s groups first marched for abortion rights and a clinic opened up in Brisbane. In 1985, the National-Liberal government led by Joh Bjelke-Petersen ordered raids on abortion clinics and unsuccessfully attempted to prosecute surgeons…

Both Labor and the Liberal National party granted their members a conscience vote, and most expected a close result. In the end, the laws passed 50-41. Three LNP MPs – the former opposition leader Tim Nicholls, Steve Minnikin and Jann Stuckey – broke ranks with their colleagues to support the laws.

In doing so they risk the wrath of their party, whose formal policy is opposed to legal abortion. The Courier-Mail reported on Wednesday that the Pine Rivers branch of the LNP called for the disendorsement of any MP who backed the reforms. The party’s president, Gary Spence, had also reportedly told MPs they could lose preselection if they voted in favour.

Abortion will become legal until 22 weeks gestation, and thereafter with the approval of two doctors. Safe access zones will restrict protesters and people who harass women from coming with 150m of abortion clinics. Doctors will be allowed to refuse to treat a woman on moral grounds, but also legally required to refer her to another medical practitioner.

What is not mentioned here, of course, is that referring someone for abortion is also a violation of conscience for those physicians who still recognize feticide as the destruction of a developing human being. As I mentioned earlier this week, it is these conscience rights that are currently under fire right across the Western world and South America, with abortion activists battling to remove any barrier to unfettered feticide.

The Australian pro-life movement continues to face severe challenges right across the country—challenges that veteran pro-life activist Kathy Clubb described in an interview with me earlier this year. Despite this tragic setback, there are still those dedicated to life who will seek to save lives in whatever way they can—day in, and day out.


For anyone interested, my book on The Culture War, which analyzes the journey our culture has taken from the way it was to the way it is and examines the Sexual Revolution, hook-up culture, the rise of the porn plague, abortion, commodity culture, euthanasia, and the gay rights movement, is available for sale here.

Read more

A very bad month in the courts for the transgender movement

By Jonathon Van Maren

It’s been a very bad month in the courts for the transgender movement, from several physicians being convicted of crimes related to malpractice and the treatment of young people for gender dysphoria, to the failure of a monumental smear job that trans activists had launched against a prominent Canadian psychologist. From Breitbart:

A doctor who gave hormones to children as young as 12 has been found guilty of running an unlicensed sex-change service. Welsh GP Helen Webberley faced criminal charges for running an online ‘gender identity’ treatment service without a licence, using the website GernderGP.co.uk.

After working with children and adults and prescribing controversial, irreversible treatments, the General Medical Council (GMC) received complaints and she was stopped for practising in certain areas. The Healthcare Inspectorate Wales (HIW) launched a case against Webberly last year and refused to give her website a licence before prosecuting the firm and her personally, after she “refused to stop providing services to patients.”

The doctor now faces an unlimited fine after being found guilty at a magistrate’s court on Friday. She will be sentenced in November.

This sort of thing is not only happening in the United Kingdom–the CBC is reporting on a similar case in Canada:

Dr. James Scott Bradley Martin was found incompetent and to have committed professional misconduct on Sept. 25 by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario.

As a result, Martin was fined $6,000 to cover the college’s costs in his discipline case. He gave up his medical licence and agreed never to apply for a new one in Ontario or anywhere else.

According to documents made public on Oct. 4, the college’s investigation stemmed from two complaints against the London, Ont.-based doctor. Both complaints were made in 2016, when Martin was seeing about 30 patients a week at a clinic focused on transgender care and hormone replacement therapy.

The first complaint stemmed from Martin’s treatment of an adolescent female-to-male transgender patient seeking a mastectomy. According to the college, Martin “lacked judgment” by prescribing the young patient cross-sex hormones during their first visit, without giving them more time to think about the benefits and risks of the treatment and without first assessing the patient’s mental health.

A lack of mental health awareness was also cited in the second complaint, for which an investigator found that Martin had again prescribed hormones on a patient’s first visit. The investigator also found the appointment’s 30-minute time window “concerning” as it suggested the patient may not have had enough time to provide informed consent to the therapy Martin had prescribed.

Anxiety and depression, which commonly occur in young people seeking gender reassignment surgery, were never specifically discussed with either patient, the college said.

“Dr. Martin’s conduct exposed patients to harm or injury, based primarily on Dr. Martin’s initiation of cross-sex hormones at the first visit, as well as Dr. Martin’s lack of understanding regarding the need to assess an adolescent patient’s mental health,” the college wrote in hearing notes posted to Martin’s online profile.

Another case has also been resolved this past month—and it is another blow to transgender activists in Canada. In 2015, they had launched a brutal smear campaign against Dr. Kenneth Zucker, a Toronto psychologist. Barbara Kay described the case in the National Post at the time:

Until last December, CAMH’s Youth and Family Identity Clinic (GIC) helped young children with gender dysphoria explore their mental relationship with their bodies and often, through whole-family therapy, enabled them to reunite with their biological reality. Even 10 years ago, such an outcome would be considered a success story. But, thanks to aggressive activism in the trans movement, today any interventions to prevent gender transitioning in children is deemed by LGBT loyalists — and increasingly by legislators — as insensitive or even abusive. Ontario’s 2015 Bill 77, for example, bans funding for “any services rendered that seek to change or direct the sexual orientation or gender identity of a patient, including efforts to change or direct the patient’s behaviour or gender expression.”

In mid-December, in a double whammy, CAMH announced that the GIC was “winding down” its four-decades service to the community, and that Dr. Kenneth Zucker, GIC’s team leader and an acknowledged academic star in his field, had been let go. Zucker had for years been the target of venomous attacks by activists for practising what they consider “conversion therapy” — the discredited practice of attempting to turn gays straight — which isn’t the case, as Zucker has always been fully supportive of gender transitioning in cases where intervention is unwarranted. But the prevailing emotionalism on the subject has trumped rational dialogue. CAMH’s decision was received with jubilation by trans activists as a victory for the movement.

That smear job has now been exposed, and Dr. Kenneth Zucker has been fully vindicated. The CBC reported the story on October 7:

Canada’s largest mental health centre has apologized to one of its former psychologists and said it will pay him more than half a million dollars years after it published a report that erroneously described the doctor’s interactions with patients.

The Centre for Addiction and Mental Health released a statement acknowledging that there were errors in an external review of its Gender Identity Clinic, which also detailed the practices of the head of the clinic at the time, Dr. Kenneth Zucker.

“The purpose of the review was to identify best practices and determine how CAMH can best serve children and adolescents with gender dysphoria and their families. The review was not intended to examine Dr. Zucker’s behaviour or specific clinical practices,” said the statement.

The Toronto-based centre said the report wrongly stated that Zucker referred to a patient as “hairy little vermin” among other errors. It noted the report was made public without Zucker’s review or comment.

“CAMH apologizes without reservation to Dr. Zucker for the flaws in the process that led to errors in the report not being discovered and has entered into a settlement with Dr. Zucker that includes a financial payment to him,” the statement said. According to the settlement documents, the centre will pay him $586,000 in damages, legal fees and interest.

Of course, the trans activists who were so delighted to defame and attack Dr. Zucker at the time are now mysteriously quiet now that their tactics have been exposed for what they are. That is the way their hatchet jobs work: They launch an all-out media war, accuse their target of “transphobia” and, ironically, “endangering trans children”—and then, if it all works out, the target’s reputation is in tatters, his career is destroyed, and a loud message is sent to anyone else who might want to ask questions: Shut your mouth and obey us. And then, even if their target is eventually vindicated after a lengthy legal process, they simply and silently move on to their next victim. After all, the process itself is the punishment—even if their smears are proven false, their target is still left with a life largely in shambles.

The primary victims in all of this, of course, continue to be the children who are now serving as guinea pigs for a radical ideology and the unethical physicians willing to serve its purposes. We have not heard the last of them.


For anyone interested, my book on The Culture War, which analyzes the journey our culture has taken from the way it was to the way it is and examines the Sexual Revolution, hook-up culture, the rise of the porn plague, abortion, commodity culture, euthanasia, and the gay rights movement, is available for sale here.

Read more

The transgender phenomenon will destroy women’s sports

By Jonathon Van Maren

Along with our recent cultural phenomenon of men identifying as women and vice versa and the wide-scale acquiescence of our institutions to the ideology of gender fluidity, a few unforeseen but utterly predictable consequences have been making headlines over the past few years. The most notable of these, if you care about professional sports—which I do not—is the surge in biological men identifying as female cleaning house at female sporting events. From the CBC:

A Canadian transgender athlete has become the first to ever win gold at the UCI Masters Track Cycling World Championship. Dr. Rachel McKinnon, from Victoria, B.C., finished first in the women’s 35-44 age bracket in Los Angeles on Sunday. McKinnon was born biologically male.

She tweeted: “First transgender woman world champion…ever*”, with a photo of her on the podium flanked by second- and third-place finishers, Carolien Van Herrikhuyzen of the Netherlands and Jennifer Wagner of the U.S.

McKinnon’s achievement was lauded by some on social media as even more spectacular because she is forced to suppress her testosterone levels to what she deems “unhealthily low” levels as a pre-requisite for competing. Others on social media accused the athlete of cheating, claiming her competing is unfair to cisgender women.

McKinnon, an assistant professor at the College of Charleston Department of Philosophy who studies transgender issues, posted a lecture she presented entitled, “Including Trans Women Athletes in Sport”, in rebuttal to those citing the ethics and fairness of her being allowed to compete.

In an article in USA Today in January, McKinnon argued her competing is not a question of athletic advantage, but one of human rights.

“We cannot have a woman legally recognized as a trans woman in society, and not be recognized that way in sports,” McKinnon was quoted as saying. “Focusing on performance advantage is largely irrelevant because this is a rights issue. We shouldn’t be worried about trans people taking over the Olympics. We should be worried about their fairness and human rights instead.”

I wonder how those who train their whole lives for sporting events feel about a biological male cruising in, crushing the female competitors at women’s sporting events, and then being forced to remain silent for fear of being accused of “transphobia” while a biological male asserts that “performance advantage” is “irrelevant” during sporting events where the outcome is largely determined by performance advantage. But shut up, the trans activists explain: This is not about achieving victory at sporting events that you’ve been training for years for: This is about the right of biological males who identify as females to achieve victory in women’s sporting events.

It is insane to think that not only do we now have to accept gender fluidity as a valid (although unproven) concept, but we also must ignore biological reality—that men are generally physically stronger—in order to cater to the whims of a handful of transgender ideologues. As one outraged feminist on Twitter noted, biological males sweeping into exclusively female events and spaces and defeating the female competition might be real patriarchy. I find that sort of language to be dubious, but one thing seems obvious: The transgender phenomenon will destroy women’s sports.


For anyone interested, my book on The Culture War, which analyzes the journey our culture has taken from the way it was to the way it is and examines the Sexual Revolution, hook-up culture, the rise of the porn plague, abortion, commodity culture, euthanasia, and the gay rights movement, is available for sale here.

Read more

Second man charged with murder after slipping abortion pill in his girlfriend’s drink

By Jonathon Van Maren

In one of those cases that highlights the sickening irony of how we treat pre-born children, a Wisconsin man was sentenced to 22 years in prison earlier this month for “attempted first-degree intentional homicide”—of his own pre-born child. Manishkumar Patel, a forty-five year old father, had attempted to get his girlfriend to swallow mifespristone (the RU-486 abortion drug) by giving her a laced smoothie. His then-girlfriend somehow suspected what was going on and instead sent the drink to a lab, which confirmed the presence of RU-486. Patel was arrested and held on $750,000 bail.

During his sentencing by Outagamie County Judge John Des Jardins, Patel claimed to regret what he’d done, telling the court that, “I have no excuse or explanation for my actions.” Nonetheless, his attempted explanation was that he and his girlfriend already had one child with serious medical issues, and he was concerned that the pre-born child he tried to kill might be similarly afflicted. According to the Christian Post:

In November 2007, Patel was charged with 7 felonies and 2 misdemeanors, including attempted first-degree murder of an unborn child, burglary, two counts of violating a restraining order, and stalking, for his effort to have his girlfriend miscarry their unborn child.Top of Form According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, Wisconsin is one of at least 38 states that have what is called a fetal homicide law on the books, known as Statute § 940.04 (2) et seq.

“The allegations are devious, diabolical and disturbing,” stated Court Commissioner Brian Figy in 2007, as quoted by the Associated Press. “Extraordinary cases deserve extraordinary care.”

However, Patel forfeited a $750,000 cash bond and was on the run for nearly a decade until he was arrested in New York in January 2017. In August, Patel was convicted of attempted first-degree intentional homicide of an unborn child, a crime which can be punished with a maximum of 60 years in prison.

Of course, if Patel’s girlfriend had wanted to abort their child, the baby’s death at the hands of an abortionist trained for the job would no longer have been considered the “first-degree intentional homicide of an unborn child”—it would have been considered a fundamental reproductive right fully embraced by the Democratic Party and championed by Planned Parenthood—despite the fact that we would have been talking about the same child. When a child’s life depends on the preference of a single parent, we have reached a level of moral schizophrenia that indicates our culture’s continued plunge down the rabbit hole.

Incidentally, Patel is not the first fellow to attempt feticide by this method. Last year, a woman in New York accused her physician boyfriend of killing their pre-born child by slipping a ground-up abortion pill into her drink. Despite a desperate trip to the hospital to see if her 17-week-old baby could be saved, it was to no avail—her boyfriend had ensured that the dose would be lethal. He was charged with killing a fetus.

And as usual, there was not a whisper from the Left.


For anyone interested, my book on The Culture War, which analyzes the journey our culture has taken from the way it was to the way it is and examines the Sexual Revolution, hook-up culture, the rise of the porn plague, abortion, commodity culture, euthanasia, and the gay rights movement, is available for sale here.

Read more

Biological man who transitioned to female angry that he has to pay more for car insurance

By Jonathon Van Maren

Back in July, the story of a Canadian man who changed his gender on his ID to get cheaper car insurance made the rounds, with much hilarity and outrage spreading in its wake. Interestingly, journalists never seem to pursue these stories later for a follow-up—so what happened to the guy? Considering the fact that what he did was obviously legal (because many of our laws now reject biological reality and allow for this sort of ridiculousness), did he face any legal penalties for using progressive ideology to scam the system? And now that our courts have been forced to accept gender fluidity, how could they possibly prove it?

Anyways, there’s now another, similar story—the sort of “human interest” story that I suspect we’ll be seeing a lot more of in the future—with the media again dutifully calling a biological man “she” like the obedient progressive lapdogs that they are:

She says her ability to drive didn’t change when she transitioned from life as a man to life as a woman, but her insurance rates sure did. Faith Frances asked that we use her first and middle name and omit her last name to protect her privacy.  

She thought she was the victim of discrimination against transgender people. When she fought for justice, she learned she is the victim of legal discrimination all women in Michigan are subject to. It is an issue we exposed. Car insurance companies are allowed to charge women a lot more for car insurance, simply because they are women

Faith contacted her insurance company because she changed her legal name. She never imagined it would skyrocket her car insurance prices $970.08 – almost $1000 a year.

“I don’t know. What do they think? My breasts get in the way of driving? I don’t know,” said Faith. She jokes, but it is serious.  That $80 is a significant chunk of her income.

“If they would put my insurance rates back where it should be, I wouldn’t have to go to the food bank,” said Faith. When it happened she contacted Attorney General Bill Schuette’s office. She thought it was transgender discrimination.  

She says she received a response from the Michigan Insurance Commissioner’s office. It explained it had nothing to do with her change of gender. Women who are born female also pay more. It included a letter from Progressive Marathon Insurance Company.  She says the letter, ironically, revealed Progressive has a very unprogressive policy. The letter reads in part:

On March 7, 2018, we received a call from Ms. (redacted), asking that we change her name from (redacted) to (redacted), and change her gender from male to female. (redacted) is right. This change did increase the rate by $80.84. We utilize gender and marital status as factors that, in conjunction with age, determine an individual driver class rating factor, which is used as part of a customer’s rate calculation in our Chapter 24 group rated companies.

“You are punishing me for being my true self, and you are punishing the rest of the women in this state for nothing more than we don’t have a penis,” said Faith. She saw our reporting on how a lawmaker who controls insurance regulations has received numerous donations from insurance companies and wanted to share her story.

“Judge me by my driving record, not by what is between my legs,” said Faith.

Feel free to laugh—the transgender movement so rarely provides the occasion for a few chuckles, but a biological man discovering that he has to pay more car insurance as a woman and that this does not constitute transgender oppression is pretty funny. (Weirdly, in every Canadian province I’ve lived in it is always men that pay more in car insurance.) But hey—it turns out that Faith’s “true self” will have to pay more car insurance, and that attempting to join a different gender can be expensive.

Maybe the insurance companies will provide a deterrent where the culture has not.


For anyone interested, my book on The Culture War, which analyzes the journey our culture has taken from the way it was to the way it is and examines the Sexual Revolution, hook-up culture, the rise of the porn plague, abortion, commodity culture, euthanasia, and the gay rights movement, is available for sale here.

Read more

In the wake of attacks on conscience rights across the West, a huge win in Norway

By Jonathon Van Maren

Right across Europe and North America, the right to conscientious objection is under threat. In Canada, physicians and medical professionals are fighting in court for the right to refuse to participate in procedures and prescriptions that violate their conscience. In the United States, the Trump Administration recently opened an office specifically to protect medical professionals from being forced into participating in abortion or assisted suicide. And in the Republic of Ireland, Health Minister Simon Harris is declaring in the wake of the referendum in May that doctors may be forced to refer for abortion.

With this in mind, recent news out of Norway comes as both an enormous relief and a pleasant surprise. From Alliance Defending Freedom:

On 11 October 2018, the Supreme Court of Norway set a new precedent on conscientious objection and freedom of conscience in the medical profession. The Court found that Dr. Katarzyna Jachimowicz acted within her rights when refusing to follow through with a medical procedure to which she had a moral objection. The Court told health authorities to respect the right to conscientious objection for medical professionals in their employment.

“Today’s Supreme Court decision marks an important step in the right direction, not only for doctors, but for people of faith in all professions. The ruling protects one of the most fundamental rights, the right to act in accordance with one’s deeply held beliefs. Dr. Jachimowicz takes her vocation as a medical professional seriously. She vowed to protect life, and objected to having any part in taking it. The Court established today that she had every right to do so,” said Håkon Bleken, who represented Dr. Jachimowicz before the Court.

“Nobody should be forced to choose between following their conscience or pursuing their profession. We welcome this ruling from the Norwegian Supreme Court. It will set new standards for the protection of fundamental conscience rights in Norway and beyond. The Court’s findings recognize the fundamental right to conscientious objection for medical staff, as protected by international law,” said Robert Clarke, Director of European Advocacy for ADF International, a human rights organization that supported the case.

In 2015, Dr. Jachimowicz lost her employment with a General Practitioner Clinic in the municipality of Sauherad. She had refused to insert intrauterine devices (IUDs), which can act as abortifacients. Administering a procedure that could result in abortion contradicted her Christian faith.

International law protects the right of medical staff to conscientious objection. Nevertheless, her superiors fired Dr. Jachimowicz because she failed to comply with an instruction that she considered to be morally wrong. A lower court found that she had acted within her right to practise medicine in accordance with her conscience but healthcare authorities appealed the decision. The case was then heard at the Supreme Court of Norway at the end of August 2018.

“This win comes at a time when medical professionals across Europe are feeling increasingly threatened in their positions by a pressure to do things they believe to be morally wrong and unethical. As such, it provides a valuable legal precedent in protecting this inherent freedom across the continent. This judgment sends a clear message to the Norwegian authorities that conscience is a fundamental right under the European Convention on Human Rights which must be protected,” said Clarke.

This is the second significant victory in Europe in a matter of months, with two Belfast bakers recently winning their case in Northern Ireland—the UK’s highest court declared that their refusal to create a cake with a slogan supporting gay marriage was not discrimination. The decision was welcomed by the attorney general of Northern Ireland as well as Christians right across Europe.

Conscientious objection is the number one target of radical abortion activists right around the world—back in July, I covered the efforts of activists in South America to label the consciences of objecting doctors a “barrier” to abortion that must be removed. That, in simple terms, is what this all boils down to: Abortion activists will attempt to destroy anything that stand between them and the right to unfettered feticide—and if they are willing to destroy babies in the womb, dismembering the consciences of a few physicians will not even make them blink.


For anyone interested, my book on The Culture War, which analyzes the journey our culture has taken from the way it was to the way it is and examines the Sexual Revolution, hook-up culture, the rise of the porn plague, abortion, commodity culture, euthanasia, and the gay rights movement, is available for sale here.

Read more

A warning for parents: Instagram is full of porn

By Jonathon Van Maren

Many parents may be unaware of this, but Instagram is actually one of the most prominent social media offenders in regard to the proliferation of pornography. Recently, Forbes actually did a break-down of just how much porn is on Instagram—and how easy it is to access it. From Forbes:

Facebook’s Instagram site is overrun with pornography and other sexually charged images and videos that are accessible to the site’s many teenaged users. This is strange given the site’s strict nudity rules, which Instagram has been mocked for in the past. According to the site’s Community Guidelines, even “artistic” nudity is forbidden:

This includes photos, videos, and some digitally-created content that show sexual intercourse, genitals, and close-ups of fully-nude buttocks. It also includes some photos of female nipples, but photos of post-mastectomy scarring and women actively breastfeeding are allowed. Nudity in photos of paintings and sculptures is OK.

Even so, the raunchy Instagram content isn’t too hard to find. Searching for terms like “nude,” “babes” or “sexy” or variations thereof or the name of any porn star in the site’s search bar will quickly uncover accounts that flout the site’s ban on nudity and aren’t filtered to prevent minors from seeing them. #Sexy has more than 57 million posts, many of which are clips from porn videos while #porngirls has more than 300,000 of them.

In a recent experiment, digital safety organization  Protect Young Eyes filed 50 reports in 5 days on hashtags that featured pornographic content and got no response from Instagram. I got no response from the social media site either. I suspect that one reason why the solution to Instagram porn problem has proven to be elusive is that too much money is being made. This is highly problematic for many reasons.

Instagram is the second most popular social media site behind YouTube among teen users, according to The Pew Research Center. The site allows users as young as 13 to have accounts though younger users use the site with their parent’s permission. It markets itself as family-friendly and tried to explain in a Parent’s Guide why teens are big fans of the site.

“Because they love consuming and creating media, sharing it and socializing, and Instagram makes all that doable in a simple, eye-catching way. Teens also like the ability to create ‘stories’ that disappear after 24 hours,” the Guide says.

Porn stars are also big fans of Instagram. Social media is a huge deal in the adult entertainment industry since porn stars are making less money than they used to because so much free porn is available on the internet. Porn stars market themselves to their existing fans and try and recruit new ones by posting pictures of themselves in various states of undress. I don’t blame them for making the most of Instagram.

“Porn stars are always trying to connect with their fans on social media to provide a rainbow of options that oftentimes leads them to where they can see more of them,” writes Don Parret, Executive Editorial Director for the trade publication X-Biz, in an email. “It’s commonplace to find performers with verified Instagram accounts to have millions of followers. So, it’s incredibly important for many adult performers and cam stars to make sure they don’t get bumped for going beyond SFW. I’ve seen numerous adult stars get hysterical over losing their social media accounts, including Instagram, over a slip-up.”

Instagram needs to either better enforce its existing rules or revise them to reflect the current reality.

For full disclosure, I use Instagram myself (I never end up taking the time to create photo albums, and Instagram’s handy app that gets little albums of my photos mailed to my house has solved that problem for me). That being said, it is obviously extremely problematic for a wildly popular social media platform to serve as a distributor of pornography, and parents should be aware of this. For those parents who are interested, you can download Social Media and Teens: The Ultimate Guide to Keeping Kids Safe Online, a very helpful guide, here.


For anyone interested, my book on The Culture War, which analyzes the journey our culture has taken from the way it was to the way it is and examines the Sexual Revolution, hook-up culture, the rise of the porn plague, abortion, commodity culture, euthanasia, and the gay rights movement, is available for sale here.

Read more

Alberta’s leftist govt. tells Christian schools to adopt LGBT agenda or be destroyed

By Jonathon Van Maren

October 15, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) — The New Democratic Party of Alberta is in all likelihood aware that they have only a short time left in power. The Jason Kenney Juggernaut has been inexorably rolling toward them since the former cabinet minister left federal politics, won the leadership of the Progressive Conservative Party, championed a merger of the PC Party and the Wildrose Party, and then successfully won the leadership of the new United Conservative Party, as well. And so the NDP has gone to work to transform the province in the brief time that they have left.

The progressive Left is fully aware of the fact that if you want to transform society during your intermittent tenures in government, then you must ensure that the education system does your work for you. One of the reasons that left-wing governments are typically far more consequential than right-wing governments is the fact that right-wing governments in Canada are often characterized by an utter lack of cultural vision combined with a cowardice that leads them to leave left-wing legislation intact once it has been passed even when they get the opportunity to repeal it.

Thus, the Left simply has to effectively use the time they do have in power, and they can have a far more permanent impact on society than Canada’s conservatives, who have generally ceded the culture to the Left (and thus, in time, the entire country.) When they regain power, they can more or less pick up where they left off.

The NDP’s Education Minister David Eggen has been hard at work on this since the day he took office, launching a two-pronged assault on Alberta’s education system: Transform the curriculum of the public schools, and force the religious schools to either conform to NDP standards, or simply destroy them. Christian schools were told that they would be forced to establish Gay Straight Alliance Clubs at the request of a single student, and that it would be illegal to tell parents if their children wanted to join it. Predictably — and Eggen and his cronies knew this would happen — many religious schools are unwilling to implement these changes due to the fact that these policies directly conflict with the founding principles of Judeo-Christian institutions.

As religious schools desperately attempt to fight off these attacks on their identity and beliefs in the courts, Premier Rachel Notley’s so-called Ministry of Education has recently revealed that the initial salvoes are just the beginning. Moving beyond issues of lifestyle and sexuality, at least 30 schools across Alberta have received correspondence from the government informing them that there is content in their “Safe and Caring” policies (which were demanded by the NDP) that must be removed. If the schools refuse to remove the offensive portions, the government could proceed with removing any funding from offending schools, or deny accreditation altogether. In short, the gun is loaded, cocked, and pointed.

And what were these “offensive” portions? It appears that in their short time left in power, the NDP has decided to drop the pretense, remove the mask, and simply declare open war on religious Albertans. Rather than restricting themselves to tirades about homophobia and transphobia and the like, they informed one school that a statement declaring allegiance to “The unchangeable and infallible Word of God” violates their School Act Requirement that “diversity” be respected. (One also suspects that the NDP finds communities that adhere to the Word of God to be frightening places that will clearly be swarming nests of opposition to their secularist utopianism.)

Even further, the NDP found the statement that “We believe men and women were created in the image of God, after his likeness, and therefore have transcendent, intrinsic worth” to be potentially “unwelcoming, uncaring, and/or disrespectful.” That one is hard to figure out, but perhaps the NDP realizes that a chaotic and amoral Darwinian framework is far more susceptible to accommodating their ideological agenda than the Holy Scriptures. Don’t you dare tell kids that they are made in the image of God, the Albertan government thus demands. You never know what might happen next.

The NDP has laid out their position clearly. God is the enemy, and religious schools must bow the knee or face the furnace. Interestingly, David Eggen’s attempts at gaslighting actually falter when you take a closer look at Canada’s founding documents. When he gives interviews — which is rare, since he is allergic to criticism and questioning — he likes to bloviate about the duty of religious schools to follow the law, never mentioning that these were laws passed recently and specifically to target these schools.

But Mr. Eggen, who finds himself so horribly offended by mentions of God, might want to read Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms. He has obviously never done so, and one can only imagine the convulsions that would take place at the so-called Ministry of Education if he and his reconstructionists decided to take the time. The preamble states clearly that: “Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law … ”


Read more

Nepal bans porn after 300% increase in rapes

By Jonathon Van Maren

Over the past several years, I have given dozens of speeches at churches, high schools, and universities on the links between pornography and sexual assault, as well as participating in an hour-long radio debate on the subject with a professor from London, Ontario. The evidence that pornography has mainstreamed sexually violent behavior and led to an uptick in the acceptance of sexual violence both inside and outside the romantic context has been growing astronomically, and I dedicated an entire chapter of my 2016 book The Culture War to detailing that evidence and explaining why pornography needs to be treated as a social crisis. One human rights activist in India has even linked the rape pandemic there with the skyrocketing rates of porn consumption and has demanded government action.

Increasingly, the anti-porn coalition is moving beyond the unlikely marriage of feminists and social conservatives to encompass politicians who realize just how damaging this material is. The UK has taken steps to restrict access to porn. Several American states have declared it a public health crisis. The Canadian Parliament’s Standing Committee on Health examined the connections between porn and sexual violence. And now, Nepal has taken steps to ban porn completely. From The Daily Mail:

Nepal’s government has implemented a sweeping ban on all forms of pornography in its latest efforts to tackle the country’s rape problem. A statement released by Nepal’s Ministry for Information and Communication on Friday cited pornography as one of the primary drivers behind the country’s rape problem.

‘The Criminal Code 2071 article 121 and other prevalent laws prohibit the production and dissemination of sexually obscene contents. In order to prevent the access of such content through electronic media, the need of pulling down such websites inside Nepal has become necessary,’ stated the release from the ministry.

As part of the measures, the government of Nepal issued an order requiring local Internet service providers to block all pornographic sites in the country. Providers are concerned about the prohibition of pornography, because it is difficult to implement new sites with adult content that appear almost every day, and the site has been blocked by one provider are not blocked by others.

However, some providers of Internet services in Nepal have already started to block porn sites. According to government figures revealed in the Nepali Times in June, the total number of rape cases has increased four-fold in the past ten years. In 2016/17 there were 1,667 cases of rape compared to just over 400 a decade earlier – a rise of around 300 per cent.

Some activists, of course, are accusing the Nepalese government of engaging in diversionary tactics, and obviously there are many important facets to addressing a rise in sexual assaults, including stricter penalties and better policing. But it is an undeniable fact that easily accessible sexually violent material is also contributing to a shift in attitudes about sexual violence and creating a toxic rape culture where men spend countless hours watching—for entertainment—women and girls get violated, degraded, and abused. This is leaking into society at large in horrifying ways, and it is encouraging to see that governments are finally waking up to the fact that meaningful action must be taken.

Read more

Canadian judges rule city was wrong to ban ads raising alarm about transgender washrooms

By Jonathon Van Maren

October 12, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – An important victory for freedom of political expression—especially for Christians—was won on October 4 when a panel of three superior court judges ruled in favor of the Christian Heritage Party (CHP) of Canada in their lawsuit against the City of Hamilton. The judges stated that the Christian Heritage Party has the right to express political speech regardless of whether some Canadians find that speech offensive, and struck down the decision of the City of Hamilton to remove ads that the CHP had previously placed in bus shelters.

The CHP’s lawyer Albertos Polizogopoulos noted that the case “involved bus shelter ads by the CHP addressing a local policy the City of Hamilton was developing which allows people to use the washroom, change room, or shower that corresponds with their gender identity and not their genetic gender. The CHP placed three identical ads addressing this live political issue.” These policies have been extremely controversial right across North America for the past several years.

The City of Hamilton removed this bus shelter ads placed by the Christian Heritage Party. Christian Heritage Party
The ads—which were accompanied by a literature drop of over 3,600 fliers addressing the same issue—showed a male entering a door marked with the label “Ladies Showers” with a simple slogan: “Competing human rights. Where is the justice?” These ads had been pre-vetted by the company utilized by the City of Hamilton to sell ad-space on City property. “The ads were up for at least one week until they were taken down without notice and without any formal process being followed,” Polizogopoulos told me by email.

“A member of the public had seen the ads, called the CBC, which then contacted the City for comment,” he noted. “In response to the CBC inquiry, the City engaged in a rushed and organized process to take down the ads without notifying the CHP or giving them an opportunity to respond. It was clear in the evidence that the City was only concerned with how the ads might affect its image.”

After pulling the billboards, the City of Hamilton apologized for the “offensive” nature of the ads, noting that they wished to fix their relationship with the transgender community and even formally flying a transgender flag. In response, the Christian Heritage Party sued the City of Hamilton, with Polizogopoulos observing that “if this type of political censorship was upheld, it could have been used as an authority to allow a sitting government to shut down any kind of comment or criticism of its policy decisions.”

The judges strongly concurred with that view, stating in their October 4 decision that the City of Hamilton had violated the Charter rights of the Christian Heritage Party. “A political party’s ability to advertise on bus shelters is an important phenomenon for the political process and for society as a whole,” they wrote. They added a much-needed and firm rebuke to the current progressive trend of equating words with physical violence by stating firmly that “Speech is not ‘violence’ just because people may find it offensive.”

In the current political and legal climate, this victory is much-needed and far more significant than it would have been several years ago. The decision simply “reaffirms our longstanding tradition of honouring freedom of expression and freedom of political expression,” Polizogopoulos stated—but “it is a very important victory because over the past few years there have been multiple cases involving municipalities censoring speech they deemed too controversial and increasingly, there were cases that have upheld the censorship.”


Read more

As campus antics escalate, the majority of Americans say that they are fed up with political correctness

By Jonathon Van Maren

It is hard to exaggerate just how much universities have changed in the last few years. Campuses have always generally been liberal-leaning, if not overtly left-wing. My alma mater Simon Fraser University was no exception, and having done pro-life outreach on over dozen different campuses, I could tell you plenty of stories about pro-choice mobs, censorship, violence, and collusion between student unions and university administrations to shut down opposing view points. But things have escalated sharply in the last few years. Consider a couple of recent stories.

The New York Post is reporting that claims of homophobia have been outed as false:

A college student was busted for reporting anti-LGBT threats that police say she made against herself. Ohio University senior Anna Ayers was charged with three counts of “making false alarms,” Campus Reform reported.

Ayers, who is a member of the school’s student senate, told Ohio University Police that she had received multiple menacing messages including a death threat because she was “part of the LGBT community,” according to National Review. But during the course of their investigation, officers uncovered that Ayers had “placed the messages herself” prior to reporting the threats, the Post of Athens, Ohio, reported.

Ayers told fellow student senators that she received the threats at both her campus office and her residence, according to the student-run New Political. “I have no interest in hearing from any of you that you are sorry… or that you can’t believe it happened,” she said at the senate meeting, according to the New Political. “Instead, I want each of you to do everything you can make sure it doesn’t happen again.”

Student Senate President Maddie Sloat told the New Political that the senate hopes Ayers “receives the help that she needs.” The charges are considered a first-degree misdemeanor in Ohio, according to the Post. Ayers faces a maximum penalty of 6 months in jail and a $1,000 fine for each count if convicted.

It seems that victimhood status on campus is now so prized for the platform it provides to the alleged victims that some are willing to fake hate crimes against themselves in order to obtain it. This comes as no surprise to pro-lifers, who have often been accused of harassment that was either entirely fictitious or self-inflicted.

The National Review is reporting that the University of Colorado has sent out some important advice to students:

Colorado State University has advised students to make their social media “more inclusive” by “avoiding gendered emojis,” in a social-media guide for students entitled “10 Ways to Make Social Media Channels More Inclusive.”

“Avoid gendered emojis when possible,” the guide states. “Instead use one of the variations of the yellow smiley faces or object emojis.”

Other items on the list include “Use the yellow emojis when addressing a diverse audience” and “Use inclusive pronouns (they/them/theirs, students, Rams, everyone).”

“Social media is a powerful communications tool,” the guide states. “So is language. Both shape our perception of the world in both subtle and obvious ways. As social media managers and marketers, that power comes with great responsibility.”

No wonder Jordan Peterson is urging people to avoid university. And no wonder recent polling showed that a huge majority of Americans from all walks of life are sick and tired of political correctness. From The Atlantic:

According to the report, 25 percent of Americans are traditional or devoted conservatives, and their views are far outside the American mainstream. Some 8 percent of Americans are progressive activists, and their views are even less typical. By contrast, the two-thirds of Americans who don’t belong to either extreme constitute an “exhausted majority.” Their members “share a sense of fatigue with our polarized national conversation, a willingness to be flexible in their political viewpoints, and a lack of voice in the national conversation.”

Most members of the “exhausted majority,” and then some, dislike political correctness. Among the general population, a full 80 percent believe that “political correctness is a problem in our country.” Even young people are uncomfortable with it, including 74 percent ages 24 to 29, and 79 percent under age 24. On this particular issue, the woke are in a clear minority across all ages.

Youth isn’t a good proxy for support of political correctness—and it turns out race isn’t, either.

Whites are ever so slightly less likely than average to believe that political correctness is a problem in the country: 79 percent of them share this sentiment. Instead, it is Asians (82 percent), Hispanics (87percent), and American Indians (88 percent) who are most likely to oppose political correctness. 

I suspect that the toxic and infantile atmosphere on university campuses and the dangerous antics of progressive activists have a lot to do with how fed up Americans seem to be with political correctness and the tantrums that accompany it. And considering those numbers, it seems that Democrats may want to rethink their sharp pivot to the progressive Left if they want to defeat the smashmouth politics of Donald J. Trump.


For anyone interested, my book on The Culture War, which analyzes the journey our culture has taken from the way it was to the way it is and examines the Sexual Revolution, hook-up culture, the rise of the porn plague, abortion, commodity culture, euthanasia, and the gay rights movement, is available for sale here.

Read more

Alberta’s NDP has declared open war on all religious schools that refuse to conform to their values

By Jonathon Van Maren

From the moment they took office, the NDP have sustained a nonstop war on Alberta’s education system, utilizing a two-pronged approach: Transform the curriculum in public schools and attack the religious schools. I suspect that the NDP is fully aware of the fact that they were elected due to a blip in Alberta’s political history—a right wing so divided that it allowed a hardcore left-wing party to sneak up the middle and gain power, as well as a shot at transforming the province. And as all good lefties know, if you want to transform a province, you change the educational system and let the schools do the work for you. That way, even if you only get four years in office, you’ve set the stage for long-term change.

The NDP has been working hard at this. They’ve changed the social studies curriculum beyond recognition. Premier Rachel Notley tipped her hand when she was spotted reading a socialist fairytale called Mouseland to elementary school children. And the NDP government has informed religious schools that they are no longer permitted to maintain their unique religious identity. Columnist Licia Corbella recently penned a disgusted column in the Calgary Herald titled “NDP’s attack on religious schools violates the Charter.” Here it is in full—it is worth reading:

Truth. It’s a word that Alberta Education says isn’t diverse enough and could lead to a school being shut down by the province. This is not a joke.

Alberta’s NDP government is making the threat to private religious schools in Alberta for including statements of faith in their anti-bullying policies.

Curtis Clark, Alberta’s deputy minister of education, is threatening schools with defunding and the removal of a school’s accreditation if they do not strip various faith statements from their “Safe and Caring” school policies, including:

“The unchangeable and infallible truth of the Word of God . . .” allegedly violates the School Act requirement that “diversity” must be respected. In the document sent to schools, the word truth is highlighted in yellow by the government, in a colour-coded document now nicknamed the “rainbow reprimand.”

Everything highlighted in yellow contains “language which suggests alternative viewpoints are not equally legitimate, which is disrespectful of diversity,” states the NDP government.

In other words, schools must teach only relativism, no absolutes are allowed, otherwise those schools will not find favour with Eggen and his comrades in the NDP.

How about this statement from the religious school: “We believe men and women were created in the image of God, after His likeness, and therefore have transcendent, intrinsic worth.”

Apparently, that statement is considered “unwelcoming, uncaring and/or disrespectful” by the Alberta government and is highlighted in orange.

In Rachel Notley’s Alberta, Truth has become a four-letter word.

The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms says it is aware of about 30 schools that received correspondence from Alberta Education last month stating that failure to remove the content, such as the examples above, from a school’s “Safe and Caring” policies “may result in funding implications . . . and the suspension or cancellation of accreditation.”

All schools in Alberta were required to submit their policies about their “safe and caring policy” to Alberta Education Minister David Eggen by March 2016. It wasn’t until September that some schools finally received a response from the Alberta government.

“In the name of ‘diversity,’ David Eggen is attacking the constitutional right to have thoughts, opinions and beliefs different than his own,” said lawyer and Justice Centre president John Carpay.

It’s ironic, to be sure.

“This is a naked and aggressive attack against the charter rights and freedoms of every citizen, and designed to intimidate schools, which are now asserting their charter rights in court,” said Carpay, who is representing parents and dozens of schools in a constitutional challenge to Bill 24’s secrecy provisions, which require withholding information from parents about their own children as young as five years old.

Bill 24, in short, makes it illegal for teachers to tell parents that their child has joined a peer-to-peer Gay Straight Alliance group (GSA) regardless of their age or particular concerns that might arise owing to mental-health challenges of a given child.

Donna Trimble, the executive director of the group Parents for Choice in Education, with a membership of 11,000 parents, says this is such a distinct infringement on parental choice in education that all members — whether they belong to a faith group or not — are alarmed.

“This is a no-win situation for these schools,” said Trimble, whose organization is not faith based, but choice based.

“These schools have two choices. One is they strip their schools of any faith-based perspectives in their safe and caring policies in order to satisfy the government’s demands, and then they are giving up the very foundation and reason for their existence, or, two, they are shut down for their refusal to do so,” she added.

“We feel that under the guise of safe and caring and anti-bullying and diversity, Alberta Education is crushing the freedoms of conscience, belief, speech and association of their citizens. It’s completely unacceptable, and if we allow this to happen, it won’t matter where you send your children if they’ve all been transformed into one-size fits-all institutions.”

Perhaps that’s the NDP’s ultimate goal? No choice, no diversity. Just NDP beliefs taught in Alberta.

“How can the word truth be highlighted as an unacceptable word in a safe and caring policy?” asked Trimble of the government document.

Eggen would not agree to an interview but did provide a written statement to Postmedia.

“I have been perfectly clear that all school boards that receive public funding will follow the law,” he said in the statement.

“Some of the language in current policies that are non-compliant wouldn’t make LGBTQ youth and their allies feel safe,” said Eggen.

“We have come a long way in just a few years to ensure all students feel safe at school despite Jason Kenney’s UCP attempting to undermine the good work that our schools are taking part in. We won’t allow them to take us backwards by allowing students to be outed,” said Eggen.

Every Albertan who cares about freedom should be deeply concerned about this, whether they have a faith-based perspective or not.

Ultimately, all of our charter freedoms are meaningless if a government that is hostile to one’s beliefs can come in and hijack your church, charity or school.

That’s the truth, whether the government likes it or not.

Corbella is bang-on—this is an attack by the Albertan government on religious Albertans for disagreeing with the NDP’s radical post-modern ideology. You’ll notice, too, that David Eggen constantly thunders sanctimoniously about religious schools “obeying the law,” while neglecting to mention that these schools had been obeying the law—until the NDP drafted new laws designed specifically to attack them, and then promptly targeted those who refused to fall in line and conform their education institutions to NDP values. Eggen won’t even talk to newspapers that might disagree with him, because he cannot stand anyone who disagrees with them (he’s even blocked me on Twitter since I began writing about him.) It is utterly disgraceful, and I’m only glad that the naked aggression of the NDP towards religious Albertans is now so obvious that even mainstream newspapers are running condemnations of this totalitarian behavior.


For anyone interested, my book on The Culture War, which analyzes the journey our culture has taken from the way it was to the way it is and examines the Sexual Revolution, hook-up culture, the rise of the porn plague, abortion, commodity culture, euthanasia, and the gay rights movement, is available for sale here.

Read more

Leftists say the time for civility is over. When have they ever been civil?

By Jonathon Van Maren

October 11, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – In the wake of Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the U.S. Supreme Court and the failure of the attempt to prevent him from taking the seat that was shamefully denied to Judge Robert Bork, the Left in America has made a confusing announcement: Their dedication to civility is over. From now on, no more Mr. Nice Guy.

For those of us who have been watching the Left riot since before Donald Trump’s inauguration, this has been rather confusing to hear. Antifa violence is frequent and rarely condemned. Protesters at Trump’s inauguration trashed things across the city, and protesters at the Women’s March reached a level of crudeness that would have destroyed the Tea Party movement – not to mention Madonna’s announcement that she’d thought a lot about bombing the White House.

This is not even to mention the near-fatal shooting of a Republican Congressman at a baseball game and the mob tactics used on other conservative politicians. Maxine Waters has encouraged crowds to physically harass Trump Administration officials wherever they can be found. Cory Booker urged activists to “get up in the face of some congresspeople.” Mitch McConnell, Ted Cruz and his wife, Jeff Flake, and Lindsey Graham have been swarmed in the last month. And the Left are vowing to continue these tactics wherever they can, despite the fact that Senator Rand Paul – who was himself violently assaulted – has warned that sometime soon, somebody is going to get killed.

“I fear that there’s going to be an assassination,” Paul told a radio show host in Kentucky. “I really worry that somebody is going to be killed, and that those who are ratcheting up the conversation…they have to realize they bear some responsibility if this elevates to violence.” Ben Shapiro has stated the same thing on his own podcast – that after the Kavanaugh hearings, civil war seems like a more tangible possibility simply due to the fact that it is very easy to imagine some politician being shot. It is also easy to imagine the assassin being on the Left.

The Left has claimed that Trump’s presidency threatens American institutions while also insisting that he is an illegitimate president serving as a puppet leader for Vladimir Putin rather than rightfully elected, and demanded during the Brett Kavanaugh hearings that the rule of law be suspended in favor of a no-holds-barred witch hunt where presumption of innocence was done away with and guilt assumed. The failure of their attempt to destroy Kavanaugh saw the mobs of the Left literally clawing and pounding on the doors of the Supreme Court. The very American institutions that they claim Trump threatens can, in their mind, be done away with whenever they cease to be useful in accomplishing their ideological agenda.

And it is in this climate that two-time failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton announced in an interview with CNN’s Christiane Amanpour that the civility that the Left has apparently been displaying up until now is over.

“You cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for,” she noted without the slightest hint of irony. “That’s why I believe, if we are fortunate enough to win back the House and/or Senate, that’s when civility can start again. But until then, the only thing that the Republicans seem to recognize and respect is strength.”

What civility is Clinton talking about? What tactics has the Left not been utilizing in their attempts to destroy the Trump presidency and stop his Supreme Court nomination? Is it the mobs at the Supreme Court and at the Capitol? Is it the swarming of politicians – the sort of thing that if it were right-wing mobs would already be triggering dire warnings about the rise of fascism? There is only once place to go from here, and that is violence. It is bizarre that Clinton either believes herself or thinks that her base believes that until now, the Left have behaved as paragons of virtue defending the vestiges of civilization.

On one thing she is right: The middle ground has imploded, and there is only a chasm where it once was. How can those who believe in a right to crush the skulls of full-term babies in the womb find common ground with those who believe that all human life is sacred and should be protected? How can the Right compromise with the Left when the Left is fully willing to utilize revolutionary tactics when they do not get their way? The Left has proven, over and over again, that there is nothing they are not willing to do to protect abortion. Abortion is a microcosm of the worldview of the Left: Violence can be used against inconvenient people, the strong against the weak.


Read more

Trans activists demand everyone be pro-LGBT – at the expense of reality

By Jonathon Van Maren

October 9, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – There are many things to say about the transgender movement as of late. They are increasingly totalitarian in their demands. They have declared war on all those who disagree with them. They pose a very real danger to children, who are declaring themselves to be “trans” in record numbers. And they are also extraordinarily self-centred.

There are multiple examples of this. The now infamous “bathroom wars” are one example, with biological males and biological females demanding access to the bathrooms reserved for the opposite sex – regardless of whether or not they have physically transitioned. Other exclusively female facilities – battered women’s shelters, for example – are also not safe from biological men claiming to be women and demanding access. The feelings of those who rely on these facilities are never considered.

But things get even worse when trans activists begin to demand that medical institutions bend to their will. One transgender person even had the gall to complainon Twitter that breast cancer patients were getting life-saving mastectomies before self-identified transgender people could get their healthy breasts amputated due to gender dysphoria – despite the fact that for breast cancer patients, mastectomies can often be a matter of life or death.

And in Canada, a biological woman identifying as a transgender man is now declaring war on the Canadian Blood Services, demanding that they change their screening policy. And why? Because when “Jack” Biamonte, who donates blood quite regularly, revealed a recent hysterectomy surgery to the staff, she was forced to endure an “embarrassing experience,” according to the CBC.

The staff apparently told Biamonte that in answering the questions, it was important to answer with the “sex assigned at birth,” which is the way the media now refers to the sex you were born into (as if the doctor just took a guess or something.) This was apparently quite traumatic. “It was just reinforced, ‘You were born female; we have to consider you female,’” Biamonte said. Which, from a medical perspective, is absolutely true.

Two specific questions really piqued Biamonte’s ire: “Have you had a pregnancy over the past six months?” and “Have you slept with a male who has slept with a male?” According to Biamonte, for “A lot of people, that’s really going to upset them. That’s really going to trigger them.” Biamonte didn’t explain why these questions would prove triggering to those who are transitioning or considering doing so, especially considering the fact that the Canadian Blood Services actually permits trans individuals to mark down the gender they’ve transitioned into one year after genital-mutilation surgery.

Responding to media queries concerning the complaints of a single transgender person – Canada’s state broadcaster has been doing tremendous work carrying water for the transgender movement – the Canadian Blood Services pointed out that the donor criteria are “based on the best available scientific evidence,” as approved by the regulator, Health Canada. As the CBC noted:

That means trans men born female are screened as women and questioned about pregnancies, as donors who have had a pregnancy are more likely to have antibodies in their blood that may cause a rare but potentially fatal complication in a recipient.

In short, this means that the policy of the Canadian Blood Services, which is based on scientific evidence and is in place to protect people’s lives from potentially fatal danger, must stay in place for public safety purposes. Biamonte, however, clearly feels that this is kind of transphobic, stating that “he disagrees that the policy is based on science.” To prove this supremely arrogant assertion, she offered precisely no counter-evidence in response.

“The screening process needs to change,” she told the CBC. “There needs to be more medically pertinent questions that are based on actual fact and not just general bias.” She then promised to continue badgering the Canadian Blood Services, apparently mistaking them for an organization dedicated to soothing the triggered feelings of radical activists rather than an organization founded to provide life-saving services.


Read more

PHOTOS: Tens of thousands of pro-lifers take to the streets in Brazil

By Jonathon Van Maren

The “Blue Wave” movement continues to escalate across Latin and South America, with tens of thousands of people regularly taking to the streets across the continent to push back against the relentless attempts to legalize abortion in their countries—attempts that are often funded by Western organizations. Rallies in Argentina, Chile, and Guatemala have successfully forced wavering politicians to reckon with the pro-life majorities in their countries, and several weeks ago Brazilian pro-lifers also took to the streets.

I contacted Marcela Errecalde, a pro-lifer who works as a coordinator with Unidad Provida Argentina, a coalition of more than 150 civil pro-life organizations. She helped organize the massive Argentinian rallies this year (they are referred to as “manifestations”), and works across Latin America to ensure that pro-life groups are working with one another and supporting each other’s efforts. I emailed her to ask about the recent rallies in Brazil, and she was kind enough to answer my questions:

What happened in Brazil recently?

Marches and national acts of popular initiative in defense of the two lives, the pregnant and the unborn child. More than 30 thousand people from different movements, creeds and positions throughout the Brazilian territory. People without creeds or positions; anyone who seeks to defend human dignity took part in the marches or acts.

What is the pro-life movement in Brazil like?

The movements are diverse. There are confessional, segmentary, nonpartisan and supra-religious, which enables the unity of all people with good will to get together for a single goal: the defense of the dignity of the human person, from conception to natural death.

 What are the challenges facing the Brazilian pro-life movement?

The lack of public support to promote public policies that support women at the risk of abortion and social vulnerability. It is necessary to spread the culture of life! Today, the state allocates incentives and resources to legitimate death, while we want Life! The promotion of abortion, especially in the media and education, is carried out indiscriminately by the government with the excuse of investing in the area of sexual and reproductive rights, even though the vast majority of the population has already stood against the violence of abortion. Pro-abortion [forces] inflames statistical numbers of maternal deaths to confuse the population and force permissive abortion legislation.

In this way we have as a great challenge the internationally funded NGOs that invest in the fallacies of data and materials that aren’t educational in favor of abortion as something good or a solution.

 What are the plans of the pro-life movement going forward?

[We will] continue to fight the fallacies of groups and foundations that invest heavily in Brazil and Latin America with studies and dissemination of the truth that permeates the theme.

To spread the truth related to the real numbers and statistics of maternal death in Brazil. Electing a pro-life parliament, investing in the culture of life education, and other actions for the benefit of women and their children.

Pictures provided by Marcela Errecalde:

Read more