Bill C-628 - Can You See the Difference?

 

March 18, 2011


From my childhood I recall a television commercial for a lower cost laundry detergent known as ABC. Typically it would feature towels or clothing, half of which were washed in the higher cost detergent and half of which were washed in ABC. Some commercials featured identical twins wearing the items to be washed. The camera would focus first on the items washed in the expensive brand and then on the ABC washed items. The question then posed was, "I can’t see the difference, can you see the difference"? An effective commercial, although attempting to distinguish the difference via a black & white TV made it a challenge.


The NDP is continuing to use this same ploy in Parliament. Just after Canada’s House of Commons narrowly passed a special rights trans-gender bill (Bill C-389), NDP MP Joe Comartin introduced an amendment to the Criminal Code (Bill C-628) which had first reading on February 1st. This amendment if passed will "remove the distinction between anal sodomy and other forms of sexual activity and amend other sections of the Act in consequence."



Currently, the law restricts those under the age of 18 from consenting to anal sodomy and carries a maximum of 10 years imprisonment for adults who engage in anal intercourse with anyone below the age of 18. Should this distinction of anal sodomy be removed, this sexual act will fall under the same laws as other sexual activity which restricts those under the age of 16 from giving sexual consent to an adult. Essentially Bill C-628 will lower the legal age of consent for sodomy such that adults will have legal access to consenting minors 2 years earlier.


Mr. Comartin is posing the same ‘ABC’ question to parliament, ‘I can’t see the difference, can you see the difference?’ There is a difference, a signifcant difference that even those pedaling equitism are very much aware of - anal sodomy is deadly.


The Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care (OHLTC) prepared  a table which was presented  on February 1, 2007 at the 'Gay Men’s HIV Prevention Summit' at the University of Toronto.  The data on this table shows  that there is a very real difference between anal sodomy and vaginal intercourse.


To begin with,  5.5% of the adult male population in Toronto belong to the Men Who have Sex with Men (MSM) group with the provincial average being 2.0%. The disurbing revelation about this 5.5% is that 1 in 5 (19.6%) were identified as being HIV carriers and are now destined to develop full blown AIDS at some point in time.  Further, this rate is accompanied by an incidence rate of 1.4% which means that by the end of 2008, 1 in 4 (25%) were HIV positive.  This rate is 250 times higher than the HIV prevalence rate for men from non-endemic countries who contract HIV solely through hetersoexual means.


We contacted the epidemiologist who authored the table and report and asked why there was such a dramatic difference and received the following response:


"The higher HIV infection rates among MSM are likely due to the greater efficiency of HIV transmission through anal intercourse compared to vaginal intercourse and the higher number of sexual partners among MSM compared to heterosexuals."


If the Ontario government table and response of the epidemiologist is not convincing, then look to our neighbour to the south. In the fall of 2010, the U.S. Centre for Disease Control (CDC) released a study of 21 U.S. metropolitan cities in 2008 that found that 1 in 5 homosexual and bi-sexual men were HIV-positive, an exact match of the Ontario government table!!


Mr. Comartin and the NDP would have parliament forego such glaring evidence in favour of political correctness / equity / multi-culturalism / diversity.  As is typically the case, the equitist ideology has little to do with reality.  Indoctrination has no tolerance for critical thinking. Those who insist on holding and expressing an evidence-based position may be persecuted and prosecuted for homophobia, heterosexism and bigotry by a Human Rights Commission of one sort or another.


Does good governance support changes in law that negatively impact the health and welfare of its citizens?  We at CHP Canada say no!


We can see the difference, can you see the difference?


If yes, then vote CHP Canada, a party of critical thinkers looking reality square in the face and prepared to act accordingly.

 

Comments  

 
+1 #2 Cleda Yachetti 2011-03-29 20:53
Just an excellent revelation of facts, of which ALL our political candidates must be aware! Then and only then can wisdom (anchored in common sense) reign, and our children/families be protected.
Quote
 
 
+1 #1 ruralrite 2011-03-29 02:05
The liberals and NDP have legislated enough anti-family bills in the last 40 years to make it clear what they believe in.
Anyone who would vote for either party is either ignorant or they don't give a damn about anything but themselves.
Quote
 

Add comment

Thanks for participating in the discussion. Please keep your comments civil and on topic.


Security code
Refresh

Copyright © 2010 Christian Heritage Party Hamilton Mountain Riding Association. Site by Cool Site Man