Conservatives
Bev Shipley (ON)
Cheryl Gallant (ON)
David Anderson (SK)
Dean Del Mastro (ON)
Harold Albrecht (ON)
James Lunney (BC)
Jeff Watson (ON)
Mark Warawa (BC)
Maurice Vellacott (SK)
Myron Thompson (AB)
Pierre Lemieux (ON)
Rod Bruinooge (MB)
Liberals
Paul Steckle (ON)
Paul Szabo (ON)
NDP
None
Bloc Quebecois
None
Tom Wappel (ON) and Andrew Scheer (SK) were stuck in Parliament at the time and intended to go.
Any others there? One interesting thing is no MP east of Ontario was there...
Also, there has been some controversy over the Canada word-mark that appears in the youtube video below. Is it evidence of official Canadian government support?
Suzanne of Big Blue Wave says no (and I believe her):
...the government did not give one cent to the March for Life. How do I know? Because I attend Campaign Life meetings, and never is there any mention in financial reports of any government money. All efforts are paid for by the donations and fundraising activities of pro-life supporters.
[...]
All it is was someone made a banner and overlooked any copyright or trademark rules-- as many people are wont to do-- and put a Canada wordmark on the banner, probably for reasons of patriotism.
Is patriotism still legal? I thought we'd banished that in Canada. Anyway, as I wrote about here, a week previous the Global Marijuana March drew crowds double the size of the March For Life, and they were all out there protesting for the right to blow ganja in public.
13 comments:
Ganga good, pro-lifers bad!
What I don't get is why pot is not legalized? Considering the amount of support, one would wonder why the libs never saw fit to do this when they had an opportunity.
Of course, maybe this has to do with progressive yearnings and leanings, when in opposition or when in campaign mode, but just doesn't pan out when they are in power.
I always find it interesting when the cons support right to life, to the point of birth, and after that, it advocates that child rearing and support is a private matter - why should we help you raise your children?
Also, their more pro death penalty stance, and right to life flies right out the window.
Anyway, if another group, such as a pro-choice rally, or the pot rally had used the Canadian logo, I am sure the RCMP would have swooped in and handcuffed the banner carriers, carted them off with cameras rolling, and publically confiscated their banner.
Not a peep from the govt on misrepresenting our policy.
"Anyway, if another group, such as a pro-choice rally, or the pot rally had used the Canadian logo, I am sure the RCMP would have swooped in and handcuffed the banner carriers, carted them off with cameras rolling, and publically confiscated their banner."
Don't be too sure. I have quite a bit of experience with unauthorized use of GoC trademarks. I've documented it here.
As I understand it, the Treasury Board only acts on complaints and it is more a civil matter than a criminal matter. From what I'm seeing on a few blogs, people are writing to their MP's about this. That would prompt the complaint(s) and the Treasury Board lawyers will likely be notified. Then, they'll likely send a "cease and desist" letter.
In my case, I was publishing numerous possible trademark infringements, 24-7, for over 6 months before I got the letter.
With so many MP's participating in the event, the use of the wordmark does raise questions. I have no reason to disbelieve Suzanne but I do think an official statement (maybe from someone with a last name) is required to let the public know whether the wordmark indicates GoC involvement or not.
Jim Elve
BlogsCanada.ca
Jan,
I think the Grits were gradually moving towards decriminalization but that died (was allowed to die) when the Tories came in.
I'd like to believe SUZANNE, but she went too far in providing an explanation for the banner, which raises suspicions in me, considering who it's coming from. It would never occur to me to use the government of Canada's wordmark as a nationalist (or...*urgh*...patriotic) symbol; the Maple Leaf is the obvious choice. I think the banner was chosen to mislead (although I hasten to add that Elve's use wasn't), and that still needs an explanation...not speculation.
Ti-guy,
It did occur to me that some of the marchers might have designed a banner that made it look like they had government blessing.
I don't buy the patriotism angle. When I travel out of the country, I wear a flag on my backpack, not a gov't of Canada logo.
For the record I think it's unlikely that the gov't provided any financial support, but when you see that logo, it's a question that needs to be asked. I think it was just used with the purpose of misleading people into thinking there is government support for this little shindig.
Whooee! Yeah, I figger whoever put that logo on there wanted it to say somethin'. Otherwise, why use it? We ain't ever gonna be able to know why they used it an' I reckon we got no choice but to take their word if they say it was just a mistake an' all's they were try to say by using that logo was "___________".
Thing is, fer the life of me, I can't come up with any reason other than they wanted to make it look like they was some sorta gummint outfit or had gummint money given to 'em like the gummint gives money to the Trailer Park Boys an' they hafta use that selfsame logo at the end of the show.
Hmmm... What if the Trailer Park Boys was marchin' fer legal pot and they had a banner an' they used the Canada thingy? Yeow!
JB
It did occur to me that some of the marchers might have designed a banner that made it look like they had government blessin.g.
The American-influenced Christian fundies and social conservatives (Charles McVety, Focus on the Family Canada, REAL Women, etc. etc.) have brought the well-developed duplicity of the snake-oil salesmen into Canada and into politics, so I'm not puuting it past them.
I'll remain skeptical until there's compelling evidence to believe otherwise. By the way, Darrel Reid's in the PMO, is he not? Maybe someone should ask him if he knows anything about this.
And if it were a pro-abortion meeting? It would have received federal funding, and MANDATORY attendance by Liberals.
Well, the next time I go to a protest of some sort I will add the government logo to my banner as well. If the government asks, I will use the pro-life rally banner as the precedent and ask why they had no problem then even though it was reported.
"What I don't get is why pot is not legalized? Considering the amount of support, one would wonder why the libs never saw fit to do this when they had an opportunity."
There was considerable pressure from the US against legalizing pot, so that is one reason.
There was also considerable pressure from the police. The po;ice rarely charge anyone they find in possession of pot, however they use that as an excuse to search people and property, so my guess is that the police are more concerned about losing the search powers than they are about people who smoke dope.
This is so true:
"I always find it interesting when the cons support right to life, to the point of birth, and after that, it advocates that child rearing and support is a private matter - why should we help you raise your children?"
For me, the fist step (at least in Alberta) would be for our conservative government to amend the child welfare legislation to make it mandatory for children's services to intervene when a child is in need of protective services, instead of keeping it optional, as it is now,
And if it were a pro-abortion meeting? It would have received federal funding, and MANDATORY attendance by Liberals.
*tsk*...such lies. I hope you're not a Christian; lies like that condemn you to Hell, you know.
Post a Comment