International
Euthanasia advocates use deception to affect public’s perception of assisted suicide

From LifeSiteNews
Politicians claim that moral opposition to assisted suicide (or suicide in general) and euthanasia is religiously motivated and then make the leap to insisting that this means such opposition should be ignored.
Euthanasia activists are currently doing what they do best: the bait and switch.
As the debate heats up in the U.K., all of the familiar tactics are on display. First, of course, there is the relentless lying. Despite the case study of Canada, the Netherlands, and Belgium – and despite disability activists, judges, palliative physicians, and the secretaries of health and justice warning that no “safeguards” will hold – U.K. euthanasia activists are insisting that this time everything will be different.
The response to these critiques has been predictable but infuriating. Euthanasia activists insist that all of this is about religion – that those nasty Christians are, once again, seeking to impose their suffering-based theology on the country. (This despite the fact that even Ann Furedi, who heads up the U.K.’s second largest abortion provider, opposes the proposed assisted suicide law.) One good microcosmic example of this tactic comes from UK writer Julie Street, who posted to X (formerly Twitter):
Just walked out of Mass bloody fuming – our priest used the homily to read a letter from the Catholic bishops telling people to oppose the Assisted Dying Bill then handed out cards with our local MP’s details on to lobby them. Religion has no place in politics or women’s rights.
There is much to say in response, of course. Why is Street so surprised to discover that her Catholic priest and bishops are, in fact, Catholic? Is she ignorant of the religion that she at least appears to practice? How airtight does one’s mind have to be not to see assisted suicide and euthanasia as religious issues? Indeed, “euthanasia” is Greek for “good death” – the theological premises are baked right into the term. Or does Street think that religious people should shut their mouths in the political arena and voluntarily disenfranchise themselves as the fates of the weak are decided?
Is Street also ignorant of the fact that it was largely due to the Catholic Church’s public opposition that Adolf Hitler moved the Nazi’s euthanasia operation underground? (We now know, of course, that the Nazis only claimed to have disbanded the T-4 program.) I thought progressives wanted a Church that stood up for the weak, vulnerable, and dispossessed – and who qualifies more than the sick, elderly, and those with disabilities? Christians are accused of not being loving enough, and then rebuked when they stand up for the victims the political class deems expendable – first the unborn, now those on the other end of life’s spectrum.
But there’s more to this tactic than grating ignorance. Progressives like to play both sides of the fence. Take abortion, for example. Politicians like to claim that it is a religious issue, and that thus they cannot legislate against it due to the fact that we live in pluralistic societies. Many religious leaders are quite happy to follow this logic, claiming that since abortion is a political issue, it cannot be discussed in church. And all the while, the countless corpses of the aborted unborn pile up in the No Man’s Land between.
The assisted suicide debate is unfolding along similar lines. Politicians claim that moral opposition to assisted suicide (or suicide in general) and euthanasia is religiously motivated and then make the leap to insisting that this means such opposition should be ignored. Meanwhile, because politicians are debating the issue, folks like Street can claim that because this is now a political issue, priests and pastors should keep their traps shut. See what they did there? It’s a neat trick, and despite how farcical and illogical it is, it seems to work with maddening regularity.
In fact, the priest Julie Street had the good fortune to hear was standing in the tradition of the clergy who stood up against Adolf Hitler and his eugenicist gang – and fighting the same evil being advanced under many of the same premises, to boot. She should be grateful. If she can’t manage that, she should at least be better educated.
Focal Points
Trump Walks Back His Tomahawk Tease from Zelensky

By John Leake
The President meets with the Ukrainian dictator but prudently declines to give him the long range missiles he seeks.
Yesterday, after seeing reports of Zelensky meeting with Raytheon executives before his scheduled meeting with President Trump at the White House, I wrote an essay expressing my dismay at how the President has—since he entered office eight months ago—walked back his campaign promise to end the war in Ukraine. Instead, he has recently made statements suggesting a willingness to escalate the war, most notably by giving Ukraine long range missiles that can be armed with nuclear warheads.
Some of my readers objected to my suggestion that the U.S. government’s relationship with Ukraine is now so corrupt that Zelensky could get the missiles he seeks without following proper legal procedures. They should consider that the U.S. government has sent billions of money and weapons to Ukraine—long ruled by a money-laundering oligarchy —without any accounting.
Now comes the news that President Trump walked back his Tomahawk tease in his meeting with Zelensky. As he put it:
That is why we are here. Tomahawks are very dangerous… It could mean escalation – a lot of bad things could happen. Hopefully we will be able to get this war over with without thinking about Tomahawks. I think we are pretty close to that.
We thank President Trump for his prudence and we hope he will continue on the same path of prudence.
Yesterday, our NATO partner Poland allowed the alleged Ukrainian lead perpetrator of the Nord Stream pipeline bombing to walk free. Such is the fantastically corrupt world in which we are now living.
The war in Ukraine is yet another species of globalist, criminal humbug that in no way serves the interests of the American people. Consider that, while we constantly hear about the “existential threat” of climate change from carbon emissions, there has been no talk in the media—including the hysterical “climate change” German media—about the fact that the Nord Stream sabotage released between 150 million and 300 million cubic meters of gas—the equivalent to roughly 5.3 to 11 billion cubic feet.
This was the largest single industrial release of natural gas, which is largely composed of methane, widely characterized as a potent “greenhouse gas.” Bill Gates is always prattling on about the need to get rid of cattle because the ruminants release methane. I haven’t heard him say a word about Nord Stream.
If I were President Trump, I would tell Zelensky the following:
1). You and your predecessors should have never listened to the idiot U.S. foreign policy establishment of my predecessors—an establishment that has ruined every country it has touched since Vietnam. Every single blowhard Neocon foreign policy wonk in this city is a total retard.
2). I am going to use my executive power—provided by the U.S. Constitution—to end the reckless and criminal foreign policies of my predecessors, including their insane policies with respect to Russia and Ukraine since the Cold War ended in 1991.
3). The United States has always maintained elections, even in wartime, and I was elected to end U.S. involvement in your war against Russia.
4). The American people I represent have no quarrel with the Russian people, and they therefore object to American weapons being used to kill Russians. To give you long range missiles to use against Russia would significantly elevate the risk of the Russians eventually using their long range missiles to strike American targets.
5). I am bound by my oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution to serve the American people, and not the interests of warring parties 5,000 miles away, on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean.
6). I will assist you in peace negotiations with the Russians, but I will not escalate this conflict in a gambit to extract better concessions from Russia. Such an escalation will only result in more needless death and destruction, and it risks spinning out of control—a scenario deemed to be unacceptably risky during the Cold War.
7). I intend to inaugurate a new era of friendship and cooperation between the U.S. and Russia, based on the interests of our people, and not the U.S. national security state and Military Industrial Complex that President Eisenhower warned about in 1961. This Establishment has doggedly maintained a state of enmity with Russia for its own selfish interests.
8). I will offer Russia numerous incentives to give Ukraine a fair deal in peace negotiations, but effective immediately, I am terminating all military aid to Ukraine, as well as all military intelligence and targeting assistance.
9). Here’s a $7,000 cash gift from me to you as private pals. Please stop by Anderson & Sheppard tailor in London on your way back to Kiev and get fitted for a suit. You look ridiculous in that silly outfit and you’ll need a suit for our Budapest summit with Vladimir.
Please subscribe to FOCAL POINTS (Courageous Discourse).
For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.
International
Poland’s president signs new zero income tax law for parents with two children

From LifeSiteNews
Polish president Karol Nawrocki presented the new law as a way to help families financially and encourage a higher birth rate.
Poland’s president has signed into law the cancellation of personal income tax for parents who are raising two or more children, in an effort to support and encourage families and boost the economy.
The newly enacted bill removes the income tax obligation for families earning up to 140,000 zloty (€32,973, or $38,486) a year. The average Polish family is expected to keep in pocket an extra 1,000 zloty (€235 or $274) per month as a result of the tax break.
Polish president Karol Nawrocki, who was sworn into office in August, presented the bill before it was approved by Parliament as a means to financially help families as well as encourage a sustainable birth rate in a country suffering, like most others, from birth rate decline.
“Financial resources must be found for Polish families,” said Nawrocki while presenting the bill. He highlighted the fact that Poland is suffering from a birth rate crisis. Last year, the number of births in Poland fell to a new low. Poland’s birth rate is one of the lowest in the world, at 1.1 by 2024, far below replacement rate. Only eight countries have a birth rate lower than Poland’s according to the Population Reference Bureau.
Public consultations about the law before its passage found that the tax break is very popular among Poles. About 76 percent of respondents said the law was “definitely needed,” and only 16 percent were strongly opposed to the bill, EuroNews reported.
Demography experts such as data analyst Stephen Shaw, the creator of the documentary “Birthgap,” are skeptical about whether economic incentives can reverse the trend of population decline. He has noted that even the Roman Empire, in its later stages, enacted policies aimed at increasing birth rates, including taxing the childless.
According to Shaw, “No society in history has been known to come out of” the “spiral” of population decline.
In his film “Birthgap,” he has documented how declining birth rates in the U.S. and around the world are being driven by an “explosion” in childlessness as opposed to smaller family sizes.
-
espionage2 days ago
Breaking: P.E.I. Urges RCMP Probe of Alleged Foreign Interference, Money Laundering
-
Business1 day ago
Canada has an energy edge, why won’t Ottawa use it?
-
Business1 day ago
Federal Budget 2025: A responsible media would ensure Canadians know about the dismal state of federal finance
-
Business2 days ago
Cutting Red Tape Could Help Solve Canada’s Doctor Crisis
-
International13 hours ago
Poland’s president signs new zero income tax law for parents with two children
-
Daily Caller1 day ago
Trump, Putin Agree On High-Stakes Meetings To Negotiate End To Ukraine War
-
Energy2 days ago
Prince Rupert as the Optimal Destination Port for an Alberta Crude Oil Pipeline –
-
Business23 hours ago
Ethics on Ice: See You Next Year