How come I can’t get a copy from Chapters Indigo?
It’s a fair question I posed to a clerk from my local outlet.
(The book is available at independent booksellers)

The clerk was unaware The Armageddon Factor was out in paperback and told me that their shipping takes about 3 weeks, which is normal for this time of year.  Because Chapters Indigo is a chain, the stores put the books out when everyone else in the chain gets them.

She offered that as far as she knew her employer was waiting on the publisher to ship them.

Okay. Chapters Indigo is owned by Heather Reisman (CEO). She is married to Gerry Schartwz who is the Board Chair, President and CEO of Onex. They are friends of Stephen and Laureen Harper, and have been Conservative Party backers since 2006.
Nigel Wright, the Prime Minister’s chief of staff, is on loan to Harper by the Onex Corporation. Wright’s appointment is noted in the afterword of the updated and revised trade paperback.

Given the paperback was updated and out in time for the election I have a question.
Where is it? Is the revised edition sitting in  Chapters-Indigo warehouses?  The chain is in approximately 131  cities across Canada and I can appreciate delays, but the next obvious question is this.

Is Chapters Indigo holding back stocking this book until after May 2nd?
As asked in the post headline. Is this bookstore chain playing politics?

How would you like to help out? Give the nearest Chapters Indigo store a call and ask if the paperback is in. If it isn’t ask why not.  If you have an independent bookstore in your location, give them a call and see if they have it on the shelves, or if they can get it to you within the next few days and post your findings in the comment section.

The e-book is available, since, as far as I can tell Random House released it, and online sales aren’t held up in warehouses. The paperback edition is also available from Amazon Canada. The unrevised hardcover is also available at my local store.

Unfortunately the Chapters Indigo non-fiction blog does not allow comments, so readers willing to find out if their Chapters Indigo has the revised edition on their shelf will have to leave their information in the BDBO comment section.  When you use the online store finder, every location you can key in, lists the availabilty as 0. Zero. Go ahead, try it.

Given the kerfuffle with the hardcover release of The Armageddon Factor last year, the delay reaching Reisman’s bookstore shelves deserves an explanation.

If you were able to purchase a copy of the paperback from a Chapters Indigo outlet, pop into the comments and let us know.

Vote Pray Serve was set up by a person or persons unknown on March 21, 2011, five days before the write was dropped  and according to Whois was registered by  Sibername Internet and Software Technologies Inc.

The website states it is run by a group of volunteers who are soliciting donations which are not tax deductible. That means this is not a charity. But what I’m not clear about is why they need to solicit funds for a grassroots get out the vote web page.

What are the Election Canada Rules?

Anyone can volunteer during an election for whoever they chose.  However registration is required when an individual or group spends $500.00. Elections Canada:

Third party
A “third party” is a person or a group, other than a candidate, registered party or electoral district association of a registered party.

A “group” means an unincorporated trade union, trade association or other group of persons acting together by mutual consent for a common purpose.

A person or group is considered to be a “third party” when incurring electoral advertising expenses during an election period to promote or oppose a registered party or the election of a candidate, including taking a position on an issue with which a registered party or a candidate is associated.

So far this group has a web page, a Facebook and a YouTube channel with two videos. While I doubt the production costs of the two videos and a web page domain and hosting purchase amounts to $500.00, there is no way of knowing. There is no way of knowing how much the volunteer group has received in donations.

What is also troubling is the lack of identification.

Elections Canada:

7. Identification of Election Advertising

The Act requires that a third party identify itself in any election advertising it sponsors and indicate that it has authorized the advertising. Failure to do so is an offence.
[352, 496(1)(b)]

The following wording is suggested:

“Authorized by the Coalition for High Technology Investment”

or

“Authorized by the United Computer Workers Association, Local 2213″

My question is simple. Does this group fall under the criteria for registration? Are they violating the Election Act?

What does this volunteer group promote? They say they set themselves up to vote, pray and serve, and then they go off into some murky territory.

ON IT is a movement of Canadians that are committing to voting, praying and serving in this upcoming election. Stay tuned here for videos, resources and sweet things you can be a part of leading up to the 41st Canadian election!

A click on the prayer tab and up pops Proverbs 29:2.  Up pops links to various charismatic and pentecostal prayer groups, with a list of what to pray about from  Nation at Prayer out of Pickering Ontario. Nation at Prayer was registered as a charity in 2006, a quick glance at the directors, and a familiar name popped up. Kerry Carmichael was a board member of Crossroads Christian Communications Inc.  This charity has expenses and revenue of nearly 100 thousand dollars.

As a complete aside, the Vote Pray Serve site promotes Family Values. Sound suspiciously like the Hope for TV campaign which Crossroads Television Network said it was issuing tax receipts for – the campaign which did not get charitable status. This also sounds like Charles McVety language. I digressed. Back to the topic at hand.

The serve tab gets really interesting.  Family friendly candidates are listed, with an encouragement to readers to get out and help them. There is also a plug for The Conservative Party, thinly disguised:

Catch 22: An “anything but Conservative” campaign has been launched to oust Conservative MPs from 22 ridings by endorsing the next leading candidate regardless of where they stand on issues. We encourage you to check out these ridings, find out who the family friendly MP is (regardless of his/her party) and get behind them as these ridings will be a tough battle for all the candidates. Click here to see the ridings.

Someone is not happy with some members of The Conservative Party, because when you check this list of approved candidates who ‘stand for morality you get what may be the parliamentary pro-life caucus;

THE VOTE THAT SHOWED THEIR TRUE COLOURS: Whether or not a candidate is truly strong on family issues comes through in the “tough” votes where an MP is challenged to choose between their conscience and party/political pressure. A vote that put MPs in this situation was Roxanne’s Law (C-510). Through Roxanne’s Law we clearly saw who the strong family values MPs were and who simply professed to be but were not willing to put their neck on the line when it mattered most (for women wanting to choose life).

Yes, the page claims Roxanne’s Law is not the key issue, but it’s the key issue. The message is, vote for these candidates if you are Christian who cares about righteous people ruling Canada.  REAL Women Canada and Campaign Life Canada are mentioned. REAL Women Canada is the Canadian arm of a right wing US group Phyllis Schlafly’s Eagle Forum. REAL Women Canada is a registered lobby group.
Campaign Life Canada is a well known anti-abortion group run by Jim Hughes. They are running a get out the vote video on their site.

There are 89 candidates listed of family friendly. from BC, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec. I have no idea where Atlantic Canada candidates are.  They are listed, back on blue, web error. No NDP, Green or Independent candidates were listed.

PEI
One Conservative Party incumbent listed, voted for Roxanne’s Law.

New Brunswick
4 Conservative Party incumbents listed. All voted for Roxanne’s Law.

Quebec
No incumbents listed. One ‘family friendly’ candidate.

Ontario
7 Liberals are listed for Ontario. All 7 voted for Roxanne’s Law. All the Conservative incumbents listed voted for Roxanne’s Law.

Manitoba
7 Conservative Party incumbents are listed, all voted for Roxanne’s Law.

Saskatchewan
13 Conservative Party incumbents are listed, all voted for Roxanne’s Law.

Alberta
18 Conservative Party incumbents are listed, 17 voted for Roxanne’s Law.

British Columbia
13 Conservative Party incumbents are listed, 12 voted for Roxanne’s Law.

The voting record for Roxanne’s Law is here. Any mistakes in counting above are mine. Assuming the best a group of eager volunteers culled their information from the same sources I did. But why cull names from Roxanne’s Law which was introduced by Rod Bruinooge, pro-life caucus chair?

Is this Vote Pray Serve web site just a group of volunteers?

On to the Facebook page. One of the first names which pops up is Faytene Grasseschi (nee Kryskow) of MyCanada. Rod Bruinooge has spent a fair amount of time onstage with Faytene and she was a strong supporter of Roxanne’s Law.
Did MyCanada put together the Vote Pray Serve website? The single Facebook admin is Judy K Jo out of Toronto Ontario. That’s it. That’s all there is.  And the fact she lists CTS (Crossroads Christian Television) on her about page along side Crossroads It’s Your Call and John Haggees CUFI situated at Canada Christian College, just means she likes religious television and is obviously a neo-charismatic. She also lists Faytenes group Bound4Life which is another right wing US offshoot founded by hard core dominionist Lou Engle. And I may not be fair, the names are familiar to me and pop off the page quickly. At least she is openly listed as admin. It’s one more person than the Vote Pray Serve website discloses.
While being a friend of a Facebook page is hardly sinister or a breach of lobbying or election laws, I find myself wondering who else listed as a friend may be financing and supporting this ‘group of volunteers.’

At the very least, I am troubled because the people behind this web page are not disclosing.
Unknown people are asking for your money and sending  the message that if you are a caring Christian – vote Conservative.

The lack of disclosure is disturbing. The solicitation of funds is disturbing.  To that end, I’ve written the volunteers at Vote Pray Serve and asked the following: Who are you and have you spent $500.00 on this election?  When I get a response, I’ll post it.

On day 12 of the federal election campaign Stephen Harper was in Markham, Ontario wooing immigrant voters. That same evening in Ottawa several hundred people gathered at a church called the Peace Tower on Bronson Avenue not far from Parliament Hill. There they pledged fealty to the state of Israel and praised Stephen Harper as that country’s Canadian benefactor. The event, called Canada Celebrates Israel, was one of four that occurred in Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto and Vancouver within a few days in early April. The rallies featured three Israeli politicians who are members of the Israeli Knesset Christian Allies Caucus, as well as a cast of fundamentalist Christians from Canada. The four events received virtually no coverage in the mainstream media but an Ottawa-based student newspaper did a look-ahead piece in March. In that story one of the tour’s organizers said it was an outreach effort to Jewish and Christian communities to show support for Israel, but it certainly was not political.

Perhaps. But the Conservatives happened to be well represented. Jim Abbott brought greetings on behalf of the federal government. Abbott was the longtime Reform, Canadian Alliance and later Conservative MP for Kootenay-Columbia but has chosen not to run again in the 2011 election. Stockwell Day, the recently retired minister of the Treasury Board, had been billed as a guest speaker at the Ottawa event, but instead he provided a message on videotape. Day was available in person at the Canada Celebrates Israel event in Montreal on the previous evening. The Canadian Jewish News reported on it and described Day as giving “a strongly pro-Israel speech” which earned him a standing ovation. The newspaper described part of his speech as follows: “Day earned wide applause when he said Israel, as a Jewish state, has ‘an aboriginal right to exist’ and that the Hebrew scriptures, written as far back as 1,000 years BCE, provide historically accurate evidence of the Jewish presence in what is now Israel.”
Christian Zionists

According to the newspaper, the Knesset Christian Allies Caucus and “several Canadian fundamentalist Christian groups” had organized the tour. Those Canadian groups included Christians for Israel, For Zion’s Sake, and Return Ministries, an Ontario-based organization whose website mission statement says the group “encourages Jews and Christians to work together to fulfill God’s plans and purposes for Israel and the nations according to the Word of God.” These fundamentalist groups are Christian Zionists, who believe that the return of the Jews to the Holy Land and the establishment of the state of Israel are prerequisites for the second coming of Christ. These Christians have found an eager ally in the state of Israel, which is desperate to avoid being diplomatically isolated for its shabby treatment of Palestinians and its continuing illegal occupation of their land. In Canada, the Conservatives court both Christian Zionists and the Jewish vote — hence the appearance of Jim Abbott and Stockwell Day at a thinly disguised political event.

The Ottawa rally had received little advance publicity but the main floor of the church was almost full and there was a scattering of people in the balcony as well, a testament to the networking ability of the groups involved. A single bagpiper and a red-coated RCMP constable accompanied the dignitaries, including Miriam Ziv, Israeli’s ambassador to Canada, as they walked to the front. There was a procession of flags, Klezmer music, speeches, and two videos extolling the virtues of Israel. Near the end of the evening, everyone was asked to stand and to recite in unison a Canada-Israel Declaration, whose words were projected on a screen in the church. People were also asked to sign a pledge sheet containing the declaration, which was left on a table at the back of the church.

The Canada-Israel Declaration reads, in part:

Whereas we the undersigned, friends of Israel, affirm the eternal and steadfast love of God for Israel and the Jewish People as clearly decreed in the Word of God. “I have loved you with an everlasting love; I have drawn you with loving-kindness.” (Jeremiah 31:3)

We affirm the noble stand that our Prime Minister, the Right Honourable Stephen Harper has taken in support and solidarity of Israel: “The Jewish state can expect the full support and friendship of Canada.” Oct. 19, 2009, Toronto.

We affirm our Prime Minister’s explicit statement in his speech addressing the delegation of International Parliamentarians and global leaders at the International Conference to Combat Anti-Semitism . . .

We affirm, as stated in the Bible, that people, nations and leaders will be blessed when they bless Israel. “I will bless those that bless you (Israel) and whoever curses you (Israel) I will curse.” (Genesis 12:3)

We affirm that the State of Israel, like Canada, has a right to exist, prosper, thrive and defend her people against the pernicious onslaught of terror, racism and anti-Semitism targeted against them.

We affirm the Abrahamic Covenant of God with Israel, and His promises, and in the giving of the land to the Jewish People as their everlasting homeland and eternal inheritance. “I will give you this land as an everlasting possession to your descendants after you.” (Genesis 17:8)

Crude Biblical literalism

This, of course, is a crude form of Biblical literalism and Stockwell Day’s remarks represent an equally selective history. The noted writer William Dalrymple says that when the state of Israel was created in 1948, an estimated 700,000 Palestinians (Muslim and Christian) were driven from their homes and land. There was no acknowledgment of that by Day, Abbott, or any of the presenters. The preemptive 1967 war Israel captured East Jerusalem and the West Bank from Jordan and they were placed under a military occupation that persists to this day. The Oslo Accords in 1993 set out a process and timetable for peace negotiations and Palestinian self-government but such negotiations are rendered impossible by the relentless development of Israeli settlements on occupied land. As longtime MPs, both Day and Abbott would know that but they choose to ignore it.

The Canada Celebrates Israel rallies were no doubt planned prior to the federal election being called on March 26, but despite their religious trappings they were nonetheless blatantly political events. Their intention was to buttress support for the Israeli government and its policies, and to tighten the political alliance in Canada between the Conservatives, select Jewish organizations and Christian fundamentalists.

Dennis Gruending Pulpit and Politics

A group of religious right lawyers in Canada who received their charitable status in 2007 for their Faith and Freedom Alliance believe religion freedom is under attack. The group aligns with Focus on the Family Canada, REAL Women of Canada, The Christian Legal Fellowship, Catholic Civil Rights League and the Canadian Council of Christian Charities.
Good background here. John Carpay of the Canadian Constitution Foundation was a featured speaker at the Alliances 2010 Christian Legal Intervention Academy held the the first weekend in June in Toronto.

There is a good post on Quebecors ‘Fox News North’ centred around the Sun media chain by Rev. Paperboy. Great line. “Goodbye reasonable discourse, nice knowing you.”  Because it has done such great things for American Politics

Whois:

Domain name: g20.ca
Domain status: EXIST
Domain number: 2550364
Approval date: 2008/11/10
Renewal date: 2010/11/10
Updated date: 2009/11/13

via: Rick Mercer

Update: The Galloping Beaver points out something I missed.

Now tell me. How is it that Charles McVety knew to lock down the G20.ca URL when the rest of us didn’t get the official word that Harper was planning a gazillion dollar photo-op in Canada before December 2009?

Hmmm???

Who is blogging?
Sister Sage’s Musings: Overpriced G20 Summit; In Addition to Closed City of Toronto; Check out the Theocratic Theme!
Pushed to the Left and Loving It: Why is Charles McVety Running the G20 Website?

It will be a long week for Ottawa’s Christian conservatives next week, thanks to former Maclean’s staffer Marci McDonald. And thanks to the fact that I have obtained her new book, The Armageddon Factor three days before its formal release on May 11, I can give you a quick peek at her book through a short summary of what she writes about. And you will know in advance why the national press will be—by my guess–running stories targeting Christian politicians and their friends in think tanks and lobby groups in a few days.

The Armageddon Factor: The Rise of Christian Nationalism In Canada seeks to argue that Canada is developing its own version of the American Christian Right, complete with various support structures and a network of influential supporters. McDonald, a winner of seven National Magazine Awards, first began to look at this subject when she wrote an October 2006 story for the Walrus magazine, Stephen Harper and the Theo-Cons, which began to look at the relationship between Harper and his conservative Christian supporters.

Although I just came from the bookstore…I shall try and hit as many high points as I can, wanting to post today.

As I used to work for the conservative Report newsmagazines in Western Canada, I suspect that I would be part of McDonald’s own personal “Axis of Evil” if the magazines were still publishing. But, in order to try to be fair to her work as I just got the book, what I will do is try to mostly report on her work in this post. At a very first glance, I fear that she will beg questions and add two and two together to make five…but what I shall do is wait until I have read the book to offer a more concrete comment, after this post.

It will probably hit the best seller list quickly. Curious? Read on…While I would probably qualify as a member of the “Christian Right”(and admittedly inclined to disagree with her thesis) , I do recognize the value of a little scoop, so I will pass on to you what I can gather from a quick overview.

McDonald approaches her subject from a position that the Christian right is likely to be scary. The introduction to her preface—I wonder if she has read Sinclair Lewis’ novel It Can’t Happen Here–reads like this:

“She stared at me across the table as if I were out of my mind. A publisher had asked me to write a book on the rise of the Christian right in Canadian politics and hearing the news, one of my closest friends was questioning my sanity for even contemplating such a task. “Why would you want to do that?” she asked. “Surely you don’t think that it can happen here. This is a profoundly different country that the United States.”

It would seem not, McDonald continues, but in her years reporting in the U.S. she found that the Christian right always develops a hidden resilience. Returning to Canada, she writes that she found clues, as argued in her Walrus feature, that there was a “burgeoning religious right [in Canada]—a coalition not limited to Christians” and that moreover the secular media—and even most non-Christians seemed not to be paying much attention to it. Her book is an attempt to redress that.

She then has a brief mention of The CRY in Ottawa introducing a friend of BDBO, Faytene Kryskow, to her readers. (What about Faytene? Please see my accompanying post.) This allows her to then talk about Stephen Harper’s born-again faith, which the media found quite odd, and Preston Manning’s role as a mentor to him. Harper’s home church is looked at. When discussing Harper’s career, there is a general sense on McDonald’s part that Harper values conservative Christian support and values, but a bit less than he values the possibility of getting a majority government.

Her political approach then leads her to looking back to the 1980s, and the difficulties that conservative Christians had passing abortion legislation. The Evangelical Fellowship of Canada’ s Brian Stiller was probably the most noted so-con of the era, so she speaks to him as well.  This leads naturally to a short profile of Charles McVety (who Bene D has written on) Brian Rushfeldt of the Canadian Family Action Coalition, and Joseph Ben-Ami who now do much of the same sorts of things that Brian Stiller used to do. The journey of Darrell Reid from Focus on the Family Canada president to Stephen Harper advisor is focused on.

Being from central Canada, McDonald knows about the National House of Prayer, which allows her to spend a chapter talking about what it does, along with David Demian.

The next chapter stood out to me, as it is mostly about BDBO’s “perhaps favorite youth evangelist”  , Faytene Kryskow. I’ve taken the liberty of doing a separate post about that, but I do want to mention here that McDonald does cite her dominionist views as central to the Christian nationalist movement she decries in her book. Bet that is a surprise to many of the other Christian figures I’ve cited so far, but I explain all that in that post.

And then, McDonald looks at academia and the related issue of creationism/intelligent design. What follows this is a chapter beginning with Murray and Peter Corren, two gay teachers who gained the ability to screen everything in B.C. schools, which leads to a discussion of the issue of homosexuality in Canadian schools and how the Christian right tries to have its own influence on the issue.  This leads, naturally, to the question of Ontario’s Christian schools and public funding, homeschooling, and the tales of B.C.’s Christian Trinity Western University and the Laurentian Leadership Institute.

Canada’s “electronic pulpit” leads to a talk about Canada’s religious broadcasting history including discussions of pirate TV broadcasting100 Huntley Street the Miracle Channel and Crossroads Broadcasting. (Tim Bloedow is quoted herein.)

Gerry Chipeur, a former Alberta Report source and Calgary lawyer features in the next chapter about how conservative Christians approach the courts and the judiciary. The Boisson case, naturally, is discussed, as well as the controversies about the “human rights tribunals” and their treatment of the press. (This struck me as interesting as a central figure here—Ezra Levant is not Christian—rather Jewish. Given that she says in the beginning of her book that Canada’s religious right is not uniformly Christian—why does Levant’s mention on page 303 stand out?)

Names of various Americans have been standing out in the book thus far, though, perhaps in an attempt to argue that Canada’s Christian right is an American creation.

In my quick scan of the book, I have not been able to find anything that jumps out at me as obviously newsworthy, such as “Stephen Harper, whose parents raised him as a druid…” (large ). But I think that McDonald, knowing the ways of a newsroom, realizes that reporters who have been wanting to write on a subject, such as the “Christian right in Canada” need what is called a “news peg”—a new excuse to write about a topic. “A new book…” is perfect for such a purpose. McDonald, to be fair to her, dislikes the Christian right, as would many assignment editors and reporters across the country. So, I would expect her to appear in your newspapers and on your TV next week.

The last two chapters are tailored for such a media push. The chapter called “The Armageddon Factor” targets “Christian Zionism” and links it to Stephen Harper’s friendly stance towards Israel. Instead of pointing out, as Ezra Levant has on his blog, that there are many prominent conservative Jews in the Conservative Party who have Harper’s ear on this subject, McDonald instead attributes this to the dispensationalist beliefs of some on the Christian right. She reasons that they want to hasten the return of Jesus and therefore need to hasten the events of the end of the world for this to happen—which include pestilence, famine and war. Merv and Merla Watson, two sweet Christian musicians with an interest in the “messianic” church are part of the scheme. (I’ve met the Watsons and can attest that they do not have nuclear weapons hidden in their autoharps.) (Fair warning– I will probably have issues with this chapter.)

Hinting that Christians wanting to cause the end of the work have Harper’s ear is useful red meat for the media. As is the last chapter, which discusses in a general way Christian conservative efforts to establish an institutional presence in Canadian politics—if you are a media reporter with an already skeptical bent about the Christian right, to have them be entrenched would be scary.

In Bene D’s own teaser post about the book earlier today, he writes that the book would be an encyclopedia on this subject. As someone who might have a good knowledge of all this—if not as thorough as Bene D’s—I can say at first glance that McDonald’s book seems quite thorough, and addresses the people and events that I would, were I to do a book length treatment of Canada’s Christian right. I might even say that it is comprehensive.

I fear a bias though…but will hold off on declaring that I see one, in my view, until giving the book the careful reading it deserves. (As I mentioned, I will address any comments to that effect in a comment on this post.)

I do know, however, that this book serves up this subject, on a plate, to those editors who want to pursue it. Given that the reporters will be primed by McDonald’s own unfriendly towards the right point of view on this, I can imagine conservative Christians having to face questions with a bit of a spin on this subject.

If you have a progressive view on all this, I can imagine you thinking “Rightly so!” But I can agree with you that there will be some very interesting stories sparked by this book, whatever you might think of what McDonald has to say, after you finish reading it.

Two of Canada’s religious TV channels have new CEO’s. Crossroads Christian Communications Inc. appointed Don Simmonds as CEO and chairman of the board in October. The press release released to ChristianWeek this week claims Simmonds was the founder of Clearnet. The charity founders two sons were finders for a ponzi scheme and were yanked from the air earlier this year. One son has returned in a lesser position as Spiritual Director and Executive Producer of 100 Huntley Street.

The Miracle Channel which saw the resignation of it’s founder over an affair has appointed Leon Fontaine of Winnipeg Springs Church as new CEO effective January 1, 2010.

Street preacher Art Pawlowski who doesn’t like by-laws, has been found not guilty of five City of Calgary bylaw violations and two provincial traffic safety violations going back to 2007. He has since stopped using his sound system, and has more by-law violations to contest.

Christian Horizons appeal of an OHRC employment case was hear in an Ontario Division Court this week. The organization runs 200 homes for 1400 disabled adults and is paid by the province of Ontario. Christian Horizons has operated for 40 years. The OHRC 2008 ruling stated the organization had no right to fire employee Connie Heinz because of violation of their morals code which the organization dropped after the OHRC ruling.  Intervenors in the appeal included Ontario Conference of Catholic Bishops, the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada and the Canadian Council of the Christian Charities. The court decision is expected in about six months.

The United Church of Canada wants to know why Immigration Minister Jason Kenney called them anti-semitic in a speech Wednesday. From KAIROS:

Addressing the Global Forum to Counter Anti-Semitism in Jerusalem, Minister Kenney described his government’s fights against anti-Semitism and, as an example, said the government had “defunded organizations … like KAIROS for taking a leadership role in the boycott, divestment and sanctions campaign” against Israel.

Other denominations falling under  the cabinet ministers remarks include The Anglican Church of Canada,  Presbyterian Church in Canada, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Canada, the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Mennonite Central Committee – Canada. The denominations are part of KAIROS which has operated for 35 years. Kenney’s office cited other sources and did not address his remarks.

Kenney’s office pointed to critical comments made by an Israel-based group. The NGO Monitor said KAIROS is a “main supporter of the anti-Israel divestment movement in Canada,” and gave a $25,000 grant in 2007 to Sabeel, a Palestinian NGO whose leader “employs anti-Semitic themes and imagery.”

Kenney’s office also pointed to a 2006 press release from B’nai Brith and Canadian Christian College president Charles McVety calling on CIDA to stop funding KAIROS.

Paul Ouellet,  who pleaded guilty to two sexual assault charges against minors  has taken out an ad in a Quebec paper explaining why he did the crimes, which occurred in the late 1980′s early 1990′s. The 63 year old was the subject of a four year investigation. 8 charges were laid. He blames the victims and his divorce and says the charges were false. The ad, placed in La Frontière last week, can be seen in a screen shot at the CBC.  Ouellet is the brother of Cardinal Marc Ouellet,  Quebec Archbishop and Primate of Canada of Canada for the Roman Catholic Church.

In a 39 page ruling this week Justice E.C. Wilson of the court of Queen’s Bench gave the Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission a sound legal thrashing in overturning a 2008 ruling that a 2002 letter to The Red Deer Advocate by Steven Boissoin misapplied provincial law.  The acerbic Colby Cosh in Macleans:

The Charter of Rights can’t be used willy-nilly by content creators in magazines and newspapers as a shield against tribunal oversight, but

The tribunals have to confine themselves strictly to the powers granted them by statute, defer to Charter values, respect the presumption of innocence, and in general act a lot less like a cross between a military junta and a three-ring circus.

Interveners in the appeal were The Attorney General of Alberta,  Canadian Civil Liberties Association and  Canadian Constitution Foundation.

xtra
Canadian Constitution Foundation
Steven Boissoin website

Who is blogging?
BigCityLib Strikes Back
Equipping Christians for the Public Square
Persecuted Church Weblog
Catholic Dialogue
GayandRight

According to Richard Long of NHOP – National House of Prayer Ottawa:

Faytene Kryskow and her team did a wonderful job of sharing their hearts and creating an event of impact.  The highlight of the night was their special “Hero” award to M.P. Joy Smith who championed Bill 268 against human trafficking.  Many other Parliamentarians dropped by to have some great food (thanks to Ruth Sowerby and her team) and to meet young adults from all across the nation.

Keep praying for the My Canada team as they meet 67 M.P.s and Senators over 5 days this week.

According to 4MyCanada (which does not have charitable status), the following expenses were incurred.

Costs for the Josiah Team (Please let us know if you would like to designate to one of these areas by e-mailing us at admin@4mycanada.ca after you sow. Thank you and God bless you.):

◦ Parliamentary Reception: $2000.00

◦ Gifts for MPs (given at each meeting): $1200.00 est.

◦ Team Member Costs: $525 each.

The Josiah Team is listed as 20 unnamed young people who applied for this trip from across Canada and who according to the website, paid their own expenses. (history)  Donations were solicited from readers to cover the costs of the event which also included meetings with MP’s. These appreciation nights are apparently in their 8th year.

Have you been wanting to come to Parliament on one of our teams? If so, we have good news for you. Our 8th Josiah team is heading to Parliament this Nov. 15th-21st (pending on a possible election)! This team of 20 young people, from across Canada, will be meeting with over 40 Parliamentarians to honour them and the share their hearts with them on the issues that they are passionate about. We will also hold our annual reception to honour our government during this week. These weeks are always amazing, and often historic. There is nothing like being a part of a Josiah team, really. It will change you, and this nation, at the same time.

There isn’t much on the 4MyCanada website about this event, the following was entered into the twitter account.

Debriefing after an amazing week with about 72 Parliamentarians!! Report coming. Updates:http://www.4mycanada.ca/SignUpForE-mails.html

2:13 PM Nov 20th from web Our team is in a very important meeting with Sen. Anne Cools RIGHT NOW….this would be a good time to pray, thanks a ton.

The team is debriefing on the day! So good. Talking about the Minister Moore (James) meeting right now .

3:40 PM Nov 19th from web

Just counted. We have 22 meetings today (Thursday): Cabinet Ministers, Liberal front benchers and new Senators….here we go!

5:04 AM Nov 19th from web

We are hanging with the SoCon crew @ the Manning Centre weekend to block euthanasia. Join the force.

2:51 PM Nov 13th from txt Working our fingers to the bone putting together gifts for all the MPs we will meet with next week. 66 scheduled meetings! Can’t wait.

7:32 PM Nov 12th from web

The report from the event and the subsequent meetings with MP’s does not appear to be available as yet on the 4MyCanada blog or in the magazine. An email bulletin from 4MyCanada  on November regarding the reception, the Josiah Team and meetings with MP’s say 19 team members met with 32 MP’s, with 34 meetings left to go. The email also states costs of the reception, gifts and food were running at about 4 thousand dollars and reader donations were requested:

In going through the Conflict of Interest Code for Members of the House of Commons, I read that elected officials are free to accept gifts of appreciation from constituents within a certain limit:

Private interest.

13.1 For the purpose of sections 12 and 13, “private interest” means those interests that can be furthered in subsection 3(2), but does not include the matters listed in subsection 3(3)

Prohibition: gifts and other benefits.

14. (1)  Neither a Member nor any member of a Member’s family shall accept, directly or indirectly, any gift or other benefit, except compensation authorized by law, that might reasonably be seen to have been given to influence the Member in the exercise of a duty or function of his or her office.

(1.1)  For greater certainty, subsection (1) applies to gifts or other benefits:

(a)  related to attendance at a charitable or political event; and

(b)  received from an all-party caucus established in relation to a particular subject or interest.

Exception.

(2)  Despite subsection (1), a Member or a member of a Member’s family may accept gifts or other benefits received as a normal expression of courtesy or protocol, or within the customary standards of hospitality that normally accompany the Member’s position.

Exception.

Statement: gift or other benefit.

(3)  If gifts or other benefits that are related to the Member’s position are accepted under this section and have a value of $500 or more, or if the total value of all such gifts or benefits received from one source in a 12-month period is $500 or more, the Member shall, within 60 days after receiving the gifts or other benefits, or after that total value is exceeded, file with the Commissioner a statement disclosing the nature of the gifts or other benefits, their source and the circumstances under which they were given.

Exception.

(4)  Any disclosure made pursuant to the requirements of section 15 does not need to be disclosed as a gift or other benefit under subsection (3).

If I am understanding the ethics code correctly, gifts over $500.00 have to be disclosed by an elected official, including gifts of protocol and appreciation.
It would be interesting to know which MP’s attend 4 My Canada events.

The only M.P. publicly named as attending the joint 4 My Canada NHOP reception is Joy Smith Kildonan-St. Paul.
Several MP’s are mentioned as meeting with the Josiah Team (69 Members of Parliament, Cabinet Ministers, the Prime Minister’s Office, and Senators). Did they receive gifts of appreciation? Reading the report, it’s not clear how many elected officials met with the team, how many assistants, and who was present at the PMO’s meeting.

The National House of Prayer contributes to TheCry which is an event held by 4MyCanada. According to the NHOP 2008 tax return NHOP donated $21,595. There are no listings in NHOP tax returns for financial contributions to previous 4MyCanada Josiah Team receptions and meetings or  TheCry affiliate.

I’ve written 4MyCanada and asked the following:

Hi:

On November 16th, 2009 4 My Canada and NHOP held a banquet on Parliament Hill.

The costs listed at 4 My Canada were as follows:

Parliamentary Reception: $2000.00

Gifts for MPs (given at each meeting): $1200.00 est.

Team Member Costs: $525 each

Does 4 My Canada or  co-sponsor NHOP (corrected – see comments) have a breakdown of the reception costs available? (Food, service etc.)? Would 4 My Canada be willing to provide the cost breakdown?

It is not clear from the website which MP’s attended the reception.
Would 4 My Canada be willing to disclose that information?

It is not clear what gifts were given to MP’s attending the reception, or subsequent gifts given to MP’s (at each meeting). Would 4 My Canada be willing to disclose that information?

4 My Canada states (19?) 20 team members from across Canada paid $525.00 to attend the November 16th event and subsequent meetings. Would 4 My Canada be willing to disclose the average age and home locations of team members?
Were all team members required to pay $525.00 to attend the November 16th event and subsequent meetings, regardless of what area of Canada they hail from?

There are conflicting numbers regarding the number of elected officials which attended the November 16th, 2009 event, as well as the number of subsequent meetings.
Would 4 My Canada be willing to disclose accurate numbers?

4 My Canada states the purpose of the November 16th 2009 meeting was to honour elected officials and share issues 4 My Canada team members are passionate about. What organizations do team members belong to? (charitable and non-charitable)? Would 4 My Canada be willing to disclose other affiliations of team members?

Thank you for your time, I look forward to your response.

There is much speculation about when we will have a federal election in Canada. Columnist Sheila Copps, a former MP, predicts that it will be before the snow flies. For who will people identifying themselves as belonging to a religion cast their votes? This is a question that most pundits and academics did not bother to ask for many years because they thought it was irrelevant, but that is changing. A new study called Canadian Evangelical Voting Trends by Region, 1996–2008 looks into the recent voting behaviour of evangelicals. The authors, Don Hutchinson and Rick Hiemstra are both associated with the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada (EFC).

The study begins on a defensive note, saying that some journalists and researchers borrow the concept of a “religious right” from the United States and apply it to Canadian evangelicals in an attempt to show that they form a “right leaning voting block”. Hutchinson and Hiemstra say those researchers exhibit a “misunderstanding of the changes in evangelical voting intentions [in Canada] over the past decade.” They include me as being among those who are attempting to force an American template on Canadian reality and of being one of those who does not understand. They cite, in a footnote, a paper that I delivered to an academic conference in 2008. Actually, they appear to misunderstand what I wrote. I do believe that there is a religious right in Canada but it not comprised only of evangelicals. It includes many evangelicals, to be sure, but also right wing Catholics, some Jews and others. Given that more than 40% of Canadians identify themselves as Catholics, the voting intentions of that group are potentially more significant than those of evangelicals, who comprise about 10% of the population. Hutchinson and Hiemstra focus on evangelical voters while my interest has been more broadly based.

Evangelicals voting Conservative

Beyond their initial observation about other researchers, Hutchinson and Hiemstra have a two-fold thesis. They admit that there has, indeed, been a growing support among evangelicals for the Conservatives and other parties of the right during the past decade, but they say this trend mirrors a growing support among other Canadian voters as well. In other words, evangelicals aren’t all that different in the way they vote. Secondly, they argue that evangelicals are more upset with the Liberals than they are predisposed to the Conservatives. Hutchinson and Hiemstra write, “The Liberal Party repeatedly tried to marginalize Evangelicals for short-term electoral gain, mocking their beliefs and styling those beliefs as a danger to ‘Canadian values.’” Since there is no disclaimer here, I must assume that they are speaking on behalf of the EFC when they describe the Liberals in this way.

To support their analysis of voting behaviour, the authors draw upon a series of electoral polls done by Ipsos-Reid and Angus Reid Strategies over the years. Those polls measure the voting intentions of individuals, and in other cases use exit polls to ascertain how individuals actually did vote, controlling for their religious affiliation.

Hutchinson and Hiemstra do not provide national data but rather focus on regional voting patterns. They admit that the poll samples were so small as to be potentially unreliable in Quebec (where there are few evangelicals) and in the sparsely populated Atlantic provinces.

Regional breakdowns

Let’s look, using Hutchinson and Hiemstra’s data, at how evangelicals voted in the 2006 and 2008 elections. In Western Canada, 69% of evangelicals voted for the Conservatives in 2006, compared to 49% among all voters. In the 2008 election, 71% of Western evangelicals voted Conservative, compared to 42% among all voters. These are 20% and 29% spreads respectively and represent a massive advantage for the Conservatives.

In Ontario, the Ipsos-Reid exit poll in the 2006 election showed that 55% of evangelicals voted for the Conservatives, compared to 35% among all voters, a 20-point spread. In 2008, Ipsos Strategies surveyed voting intentions prior to the election. Hutchinson and Hiemstra calculate that on Election Day “almost half [50%] of Ontario Evangelicals could be presumed to have supported the Conservatives.” The authors conclude that this decline in Ontario evangelical support, from 55% to 50%, is evidence that “Conservative evangelical support levels seem to have stalled or retreated from their 2006 highs.” Perhaps, but having 50% of evangelicals vote for the Conservatives in an election contested by three major parties and the Greens represents a huge advantage for the Conservatives.

In Quebec, 45% of evangelicals voted Conservative in 2006, compared to 25% among all voters, a 20-point advantage. In 2008, because of the small sample, the authors do not attempt to provide a comparable number for Quebec. In the Atlantic provinces, again with small samples, 54% of evangelicals voted Conservative in 2006 compared to 35% among all voters, a 19-point spread.  In 2008, the authors estimate that 30% of Atlantic evangelicals voted Conservative compared to 19% among all voters, an 11-point advantage.

Hutchinson and Hiemstra reach the following conclusion based on their research: “While the voting tracks of Canadian Evangelicals and their regional neighbours still run more or less parallel, they have moved farther apart in 2008 than they were in 1996.” This is really quite an understatement. They go on to say that, “As of 2008 the growth in evangelical support for the Conservative Party appears to either have  reached a plateau or begun to decline.” I would argue, using the authors’ own numbers, that in 2008 the Conservatives remained overwhelmingly the party of choice for evangelical voters, particularly in Western Canada (71%) and in Ontario (50%). In fact, I would, indeed, characterize the Western Canadian and Ontario evangelical vote on behalf of the Conservatives in 2006 and 2008 as a “right-leaning voting block.”

Evangelicals and Liberals

I want now to return to the claim that evangelicals are not so much attracted by the Conservatives as they are repelled by the Liberals, who the authors say have ridiculed evangelicals for short-term political advantage and attempted to marginalize them and even to portray them as “un-Canadian”. The authors provide no evidence for this claim other than their own opinions and in one case an anecdote from radio talk show host Michael Coren. The authors recognize this deficiency, although they give it only a passing reference: “While the data are not available to tell us definitively why evangelical voter support for the Liberal Party fell off rapidly,” they write, “the most plausible explanation is a reaction to the party’s electoral tactics.” The authors provide six narrative examples of what they describe as “Liberal attempts to marginalize Evangelicals and stifle dissent for political gain…”

Among those examples is the Liberals’ handling of legislation regarding same sex marriage. By 2002, the courts had begun to rule that the existing definition of marriage was unconstitutional, or, described in another way, that the laws must be changed to allow for same sex marriage.  The authors say: “The government chose not to appeal the [court] decision and announced it would introduce legislation to redefine marriage. . . and the government became an advocate for the redefinition of marriage, contending same-sex marriage was a human rights issue and required by the Charter.”

Same sex marriage was (and remains) a contentious public policy issue but I fail to see why the Liberal government’s acting in accordance with the court rulings should be understood as an insult to evangelicals. To use a parallel example, many Christians are opposed to Canada’s war in Afghanistan, but should they consider themselves to be personally insulted because the Conservative government has not stopped waging the war?

The authors conclude that, “The Canadian Evangelical vote is currently fluid.” It is perhaps less fluid than they suggest, but I do agree that we cannot predict the future. Individuals and groups obtain influence by exercising what the sociologists describe as “agency.” We are not merely spectators in history but can have an impact on it. Religion appears poised to play a larger role upon the public stage in the foreseeable future than has been the case for a good number of years, but no one can easily predict the outcome of that activity.

I will, in a future posting, comment upon another study of religious voting behaviour, mainly as it relates to the Liberals. The authors are McGill University’s Elisabeth Gidengil and a number of her colleagues from different campuses who have co-operated through various elections in a project called the Canadian Election Study (CES).

Pulpit & Politics