Column: Does Jonathon Van Maren Speak For The Faith Community?

UPDATED 15/06/11 – COMMENTS RECEIVED – By Mike Archer. Jonathon Van Maren has gone too far with his vulgar anti-abortion campaign in choosing to bully the children of Chilliwack Middle School and Chilliwack Secondary with his indecent outburst of lewd photographs.

Editor’s Note: Originally published on Chilliwack Today 08/06/11

Though the RCMP and the City of Chilliwack Bylaw Department were called it was determined that since the group were on a public sidewalk they were not infringing on any municipal statutes and Van Maren had every right to be there under Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

What about the rights of Chilliwack parents to expect their children to be safe from such exhibits of vulgarity at the school ground? What about the rights of the children not to be bullied and accosted with such filth?

Bully – noun DEF:domineering person SYN: annoyer, antagonizer, browbeater, bulldozer, coercer, harrier, hector, insolent, intimidator, oppressor, persecutor, pest, rascal, rowdy, ruffian, tease, tormenter, tough

Schools Are Supposed To Be Bully Free Zones

Bully – verb DEF: intimidate, push around SYN: bludgeon, bluster, browbeat, buffalo, bulldoze, coerce, cow, despotize, domineer, dragoon, enforce, harass, hector, lean on, menace, oppress, overbear, persecute, ride roughshod, showboat, swagger, terrorize, threaten, torment, torture, turn on the heat, tyrannize, walk heavy

Lewd Рadjective DEF: vulgar, indecent SYN:X-rated, bawdy, blue, coarse, erotic, fast*, filthy*, foul-mouthed, gross*, hard-core, immodest, immoral, improper, impure, in bad taste, incontinent, indelicate, lascivious, lecherous, libertine, libidinous, licentious, loose*, lustful, naughty, obscene, off-color, pornographic, profligate, questionable, racy, rakish, ribald, risqu̩, salacious, scandalous, scurrilous, shameless, smutty, suggestive, taboo, unchaste, unclean, unconventional, unvirtuous, vile, wanton, wicked

Immoral – adjective DEF: evil, degenerate
Synonyms: X-rated, abandoned, bad, corrupt, debauched, depraved, dishonest, dissipated, dissolute, fast*, graceless, impure, indecent, iniquitous, lewd, licentious, loose*, nefarious, obscene, of easy virtue, pornographic, profligate, rakish, reprobate, saturnalian, shameless, sinful, speedy, unchaste, unclean, unethical, unprincipled, unscrupulous, vicious, vile, villainous, wicked, wrong – immoral means violating principles of right and wrong or not adhering to ethical or moral principles

Christian – adjective DEF: moral, righteous SYN: clean, conscientious, correct, decent, elevated, equitable, fair, fitting, good, high-principled, honest, honorable, humane, just, kosher*, moralistic, noble, principled, proper, respectable, right, right-minded, square, straight, true blue, upright, upstanding, virtuous
Antonyms: corrupt, dishonest, immoral, improper, unethical, unjust, unrighteous

This isn’t the first time Van Maren and his band of immoral quacks have assaulted the citizens of Chilliwack with their sick messaging. Earlier this spring they foisted their grotesque images on citizens walking through Downtown Chilliwack (Opinion: Anti-Abortion Quacks Greet Shoppers With Disgusting Images -NSFW)

These bullies in christian clothing come from the Canadian Centre For Bioethical Reform and purport to be spreading god’s word claiming they are being deliberately provocative with their use of 3×4-foot images of dismembered first trimester foetuses.
.
Today Media has never had as many comments on a single post as we did when we published the above column on our sister site, Langley Today – 43 Comments – because the lunatic fringe came out like piranhas in a feeding frenzy, rapturous that somebody was paying attention and bearing witness to their bizarre expression of faith. It makes for some interesting reading from a psychological point of view, but frankly serves only to show how warped some on the far religious right can get trying to quiet the voices in the heads.
.
Seemingly oblivious the the consequences of his actions and defending them Van Maren told The Chilliwack Times, “No kids got worked up at any point.”
.
The Chilliwack School Board should act immediately to have Van Maran and his crew kept from within ten blocks of any school in Chilliwack. Other School Districts in the Fraser Valley should take heed of Van Maren’s actions in Chilliwack lest he decide to repeat them in other cities.
.
Someone in the Faith Community should stand up and be counted on this issue by denouncing Van Maren and his coterie lest the tactics they employ and the glee they seem to experience with the inevitable attention they get be confused with any of the teachings of god or the practices and beliefs of the churches in the community.

20 Comments

1. 

   Mike Archer

   June 11, 2011 at 11:59 pm

   # Leo Says:
   June 8th, 2011 at 7:07 am

   You rock Van Maren! Show people what this is really about. It’s high time everybody gets to know the seriousness of this issue.

   Reply
2. 

   Mike Archer

   June 12, 2011 at 12:00 am

   # sobedaya Says:
   June 8th, 2011 at 9:15 am

   oh I agree that the issue is serious! People’s freedoms are being trampled on. For those who are standing up for the rights of the fetus, are they keeping the rights of the pregnant woman in mind as well?
   Pregnancy is a beautiful thing, a baby is a miracle, but as long as there are unwanted pregnancies and women having their lives ruined due to one mistake or one act of crime, there needs to be a safe and legal way AND SUPPORT for the woman in question so she and she alone can make a choice for herself and the rest of her life. Give her all available options, council her and then support her in whatever decision she makes as no matter what she does, this will stay with her for the rest of her life. What about the guy who was part of this, where is he? Does he even stick around?

   Van Maren will NEVER have to face an abortion, he will NEVER have to deal with the emotional hell that I can only imagine a woman has to go through when faced with such a devastating decision.
   We are all entitled to our views but I think his time would be better served sharing his view in a softer and more positive way. And maybe teach men that THEIR hormonal actions can cause a living hell for a woman!

   Reply
3. 

   Mike Archer

   June 12, 2011 at 12:00 am

   # Kim Says:
   June 9th, 2011 at 9:20 am

   This guy has zero class. His message is clouded by his egotistic, self righteous, attitude towards HIS cause and HIS rights. He doesn’t care about anyone but himself. This is why people avoid church like the plague. It’s a mental illness and a sickness and if you are behind this guy, you should check yourself in to the nearest pysch ward. He’s warped.

   Reply
4. 

   Mike Archer

   June 12, 2011 at 12:00 am

   # Leo Says:
   June 9th, 2011 at 1:16 pm

   @Kim Speaking of “warped”, the decision to have an abortion is warped. Have you ever seen the result of an abortion?? If you consider abortion to be a easy way out of an unwanted situation which you had the ability and power to prevent in the first place, perhaps you should get yourself checked out.
   @sobedaya Van Maren’s organization, namely CCBR based out of Calgary, Alberta, and part of an ever growing internation organization for Bio-Ethical Reform, provides unlimited resources to women who feel their pregnancy is unwanted, or if their preganacy is result of a crime. There are Preganancy Crisis lines which can be contacted, there are adoption lists which the child can be placed on, etc. http://www.unmaskingchoice.ca Statistics show that “emotional hell” comes to a majority of the women who go through with an abortion, and on the contrary, women who go through with an adoption program or actually keeping the child, never ever regret not having taken the abortion.

   Reply
5. 

   Mike Archer

   June 12, 2011 at 12:01 am

   # Jonathon Van Maren Says:
   June 9th, 2011 at 10:56 pm

   Mr. Archer:

   I don’t object to your slew of ad hominems, but I and my companions have never claimed to be doing “god’s work” as you put it. If you actually read our mission statement on the website you would realize this. I’m not sure if this is a straw man, terrible journalism, or outright deceit, but we are not a religious organiztation (sic). Thank you.

   Reply
6. 

   Mike Archer

   June 12, 2011 at 12:01 am

   # admin Says:
   June 10th, 2011 at 10:41 pm

   OK Then we’ll call you a Heathen.
   Come on Jonathon, stop being embarrassed about your religious connections. They would be surprised to hear you hiding your beliefs.

   Be up front about them. Like you are on the part of your website called ‘Endorsements’.

   Is it me or are they all church leaders:

   Rt. Rev. John Braganza, OSB, Abbot of Westminster Abbey (Mission, British Columbia)

   Deacon Daniel Dauvin (Killaloe, Ontario)

   Rev. Richard Kowalchuk, PP, Corpus Christi Roman Catholic Church (Thunder Bay, Ontario)

   Fr. Taras (Kraychuk), Priest/Monk, Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church

   Fr. Al Momney, Lecturer in Theology, St. Peter’s Seminary (London, Ontario)

   Rev. John Stefan Obeda, Lutheran minister, retired (London, Ontario)

   Fr.Frank Pavone, National Director, Priests for Life (Staten Island, New York)

   Pastor Amor Ruba, Faith Builder International Church (Calgary, AB)

   Pastor Ron Stone, Parkdale Grace Fellowship (Calgary, AB)

   Fr. Tony Van Hee, S.J., Jesuits in English Canada (Vanier, Ontario)

   Michael Welbers, Youth Director, Woodgreen Presbyterian Church (Calgary, Alberta)

   Rev. Daniel Winter, Young Adult Ministries Outreach, Metropolitan Bible Church (Ottawa, Ontario)

   Rev. Lawrence Yuen, Vancouver Chinese Alliance Church — Knight St. and Fraser Lands Campuses (Vancouver, British Columbia)

   HMMMMM
   Not a heathen or laymen among them…

   Mike Archer

   Ref: http://www.unmaskingchoice.ca/endorsements_ccbr.html

   Reply
7. 

   Mike Archer

   June 12, 2011 at 12:01 am

   # Jonathon Van Maren Says:
   June 11th, 2011 at 1:00 am

   I’m not embarassed about religious connections. My companion at the Chilliwack protests is a Catholic. I personally am a Dutch Protestant. But your insinuation is that we are making a religious argument, which we are not. We are making an argument based on biology, embryology, and philosophy. We are not on the streets telling people that abortion is wrong because churches tell them it is. We are telling them that it is wrong because it kills a human being. All people with functioning consciences, both religious, atheist, agnostic, etc, should be able to agree that killing human beings is wrong.

   On this, I challenge you to an open debate, in any forum, anywhere you choose.

   Reply
8. 

   Mike Archer

   June 12, 2011 at 12:02 am

   # Jonathon Van Maren Says:
   June 11th, 2011 at 2:21 pm

   Mr. Archer:

   I am completely serious. You have seen fit to criticize me and my methods through a string of fallacious “arguments” which are laughably defeatable to anyone with a basic grasp of philosophical consistency. I assume you have your reasons for your views and for your reaction to CCBR’s protest–although it is somewhat confusing since you don’t have a problem with abortion, so the exposure of it shouldn’t be a big deal. I am willing to debate you on abortion and the appropriateness of graphic strategy at a place you may choose (or I will find a venue if you prefer). I assume, since you believe I am a “quack” and a moron, that you would welcome the chance to publicly debate me and prove this to an audience. I would suggest this as the format: Opening statement: 20 minutes each; Cross examination: 10 minutes each; Rebuttal: 10 minutes each; Concluding statement: 5 minutes each; Q & A from audience. I look forward to your response.

   Reply
9. 

   Mike Archer

   June 12, 2011 at 12:02 am

   # admin Says:
   June 11th, 2011 at 9:18 pm

   Jonathon:
   Some of my best friends are Catholics too but I don’t use them to either bolster my arguments, give them false credibility or, conveniently hide from reference to them when I want to switch tactics.

   Some of my best friends are students of philosophy too. So you can file the “… anyone with a basic grasp of philosophical consistency” crap.

   Your philosophically flawed use of false dichotomy (which makes your use of the ‘straw man’ defence laughable) demonstrates one of the basic philosophical flaws in your approach and is one of the main things that makes your grotesque media-baiting tactics so repulsive.

   I have no interest in assuaging your need for attention, nor providing you with another public platform for your diatribe by participating in the public debate you suggest. I think the 25,000 unique visitors that come to the Today websites every month represent a large enough cross section of the population to satisfy even your need for any audience.

   The issue with which you seem unable to grapple – abortion – is one that is complex, nuanced and politically charged. To reduce it to your simplistic, childlike view of the world as one in which there exist only good and evil, right and wrong, ‘for us’ and ‘against us’ options may provide you with a comforting trip through life, knowing you’re always on the ‘right’ side of the very simple world in which you live, but public discourse requires a bit more subtlety of understanding, an awareness of ideas other than one’s own, and an ability to see the world as a complex and complicated place.

   Every time you parade your pictures in front of adults, children or other members of the unsuspecting public on our streets you demean the views, not only of those who believe a woman should have a choice. You demean those who have strong and legitimate views on the other side of the debate.

   To reduce such a fractious and difficult issue to grotesque photos of aborted foetuses is simply a childish insult to the women who face the toughest choice of their lives and to all of those who, while objecting to abortion as a means of birth control, are reduced to your level by the inevitable comparison.

   You’ve got a website. You publish your despicable views. Be satisfied with that any stop assaulting our children with your sick and repulsive behaviour.

   Mike Archer

   Reply
10. 

    Mike Archer

    June 12, 2011 at 1:01 am

    Submitted on 2011/06/12 at 12:13 am

    Jonathon Van Maren Says:

    For starters: while I am not Catholic, I have never “hidden” my Catholic friends: I was simply saying that our arguments are not religious, which you have once again obviously avoided. Saying that you, too, have Catholic friends, is obviously irrelevant since it was you who wanted to use religious affiliation to discolor viewpoint. It suprises me that you would want to neutralize a point that you felt was on your side.

    You have said that some of your best friends are students of philosophy–you obviously need to take some lessons from them, as your personal skills are abysmal, especially considering that while you personally consider me of substandard intelligence, you do not have the courage to debate me in person.

    As I have said multiple times, and our website has also explained, the strategy of showing what abortion does–again, it is ironic that people such as yourself support abortion while not supporting the display of what abortion does, regardless of whether it is legal or not–is a historically proven one: I encourage you to watch this video and its companions: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zd_V0KY4qw

    I do not boil down abortion to those who simply use it as birth control. While I understand your need to characterize my arguments and the arguments of CCBR to that simplistic and unresearched characterization, I once again challenge you to a debate–whether public or private–on the issue of abortion, which you claim I have a simplistic view of. If you believe your own statement, that I have an uneducated view, again, I would obviously assume by the nature of your vitriol that you would enjoy proving this to a larger group. If you destroy my arguments, than you would be validated in your columns. If not, you would be at the very least forced to reconsider your assumptions–if you are intellectually honest enough.

    I get the feeling that you are someone who enjoys attacking people without ever having to face them in public. It is all well and good to say that my views are invalid and that I am an idiot if you never have to actually prove this. I am willing to meet you face to face, again, in a forum of your choosing, and debating the topic of abortion. Not what you think is my position, since you clearly do not want to research that, and not what you would like to characterize my position as. Your position against mine, my friend.

    Let’s see if you actually believe what you say. Because if you do, you will welcome the opportunity to publicly prove that my position is fallacious and incoherent. Otherwise, in the words of many religious people in the past, speak now or forever hold your peace. You have the opportunity to prove that I’m all the names you call me. Do it.

    Reply
11. 

    Mike Archer

    June 12, 2011 at 1:47 am

    June 12th, 2011 at 1:45 am e

    Hey Johnathon:
    In fairness, you seem to have missed my previous comment.
    Mike

    Reply
12. 

    Mike Archer

    June 12, 2011 at 1:55 am

    JD Says:
    Man, this guy’s a toolbag.

    Reply
13. 

    Mike Archer

    June 12, 2011 at 6:37 pm

    sobedaya Says:
    June 12th, 2011 at 11:34 am

    Johnnie ,until the day YOU face the personal heart wrenching choice of an unwanted pregnancy in YOUR OWN body, keep your “in your face” posters to yourself! You have no clue what a woman goes through! NO clue!

    The other thing your website shows is that you and your kind are against stem cell research as well, another fine example of something you clearly don’t need. I hope for your sake you will never need stem cells.

    I’ve met people like you before, and while you are entitled to your own opinion, this desperate need of yours to keep your views in the media is beyond annoying.

    I think the editor is very smart not to take your bait, he’s got nothing to prove. You provoke people which is your intent, and whatever good you are trying to do is not achieved with your personality and your loud mouth!

    Go away!

    Reply
14. 

    Mike Archer

    June 13, 2011 at 8:31 am

    Nina Says:

    As a parent, I would get a restraining order against that nut job. He’s down right dangerous and I don’t want him or his fellow church/cult members anywhere near my child.

    As a public citizen I suppose I appreciate knowing about this threat to society, but, at the same time, I resent his filth stealing my life time (in the media) because his delusions demand attention.

    In truth, I would say his actions would be beneath contempt, if he were sane. Obviously there are issues there that only professional mental health practitioners could address.

    Reply
15. 

    Mike Archer

    June 13, 2011 at 8:34 am

    Leo Says:
    June 13th, 2011 at 7:36 am e
    Mike Archer,

    You seem to me like a big coward, unwilling to come out and face the facts that prove you a senseless and immoral person, hiding behind your “25000 unique visitors”. Be a man, come forward, debate this respectable Mr. van Maren. If you are as right as you claim to be, I don’t see the problem. And hey, if you are so right, we can post this debate and perhaps get you even more “unique” visitors. Hmmm…unique in which way??….
    Let’s go Mr. Archer, as a “succesful” editor, show your self.

    Leo

    Reply
16. 

    poffles

    June 13, 2011 at 4:37 pm

    All I see from “Leo” and “Jonathan” is rabid testosterone-fueled confrontation. Hardly lends any credibility to their cause. “Your” attempts at intelligent debate also fall grossly short. I think that “Mike” is most correct in not wasting his time on a so-called debate. It’s plainly obvious you think that the words that come from your heads are miraculously correct and smite your opponents with their righteousness. All I see are two very naive, inexperienced and grossly egotistical abusers. If there are any people sitting on the fence, trying to decide if they are pro-life of pro-choice, you are certainly pushing them towards pro-choice with your despicable tactics and arrogant message. (As I am one of those people who could never abort a child unless my life was in danger.)

    Both of you, stay away from my child and my child’s school. I am a parent who will use the law (restraining orders) to keep your filthy images from traumatizing my offspring.

    Reply
17. 

    Mike Archer

    June 14, 2011 at 7:23 am

    James Breckenridge Says:

    Reading the column “Does Jonathon Van Maren Speak For The Faith Community” [http://www.abbotsfordtoday.ca/?p=60359] there are several points I must disagree with Mr Archer on.

    Foremost is the fact that whatever Van Maren and his acolytes may be, they are clearly and undeniably NOT Christians. They cannot even be said to be christians.

    Van Maren and his acolytes are like those who claim or are said to be christians, who harangue people with their raving diatribes about the need to keep Christ in Christmas when they should be focused on getting Christ into Christian, into themselves, into their behaviours, into their lives and into their souls, their essence.

    Van Maren quotes from the bible and evokes God as the authorities for his pernicious teachings, malignant ideology and repugnant behaviours. While that may allow him to claim to be a Biblian or a Goddian it has nothing to do with being Christian.

    Being Christian requires one to base how one lives on the teachings of Christ, a reality that most of those who like to label themselves Christians forget or more likely ignore or live in denial of.

    Why “… forget or more likely ignore or live in denial of”? Christ taught not just through his words but through his actions, the way he lived his life. He did not judge, or hate, was about forgiveness – no matter what the trespass – about sharing with those in need [and not simply the crumbs left after one had all the luxuries and toys one wants), he was not about things and possessions but people's needs, about loving thy enemies, about not throwing the first stone, about loving thy brothers (fellow man) as thyself, about doing unto others as you would have done unto you.

    In other words: struggling to live the teachings, the actions, the life of Christ requires a great deal of those who seek to be Christians. It is far, far easier to call yourself christian than it is to be Christian.

    Mr Archer questioned why the leaders of the Christian community are silent on Van Maren and his acolytes. The answer is that those he refers to as the leaders of the Christian community no more practice and live as a follower of Christ (and thus are no more Christian) than do the preponderance of those who lay claim to being Christian.

    Which is undoubtedly why Ghandi observed: "I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."

    Christianity exists only where it is practiced. Tao of James

    Mr Archers second major error was in calling Van Maren and his acolytes bullies. They are not bullies who bullied. They are thugs who assaulted - traumatized - children with pornography (obscene [abominable; disgusting; repulsive, depraved ] drawings, photographs, or the like). Thugs whose actions make them child abusers.

    Recall that child abuse includes the emotional mistreatment of children. So any act or series of acts of commission that results in harm, potential for harm, or threat of harm to a child is child abuse. These acts can occur in schools or communities the child interacts with.

    The images Van Maren assaulted and caused harm to the students with were more traumatic and potentially damaging than simply exposing himself to the children would have been.

    Worse, Van Maren and his acolytes committed this act of assaulting the students minds for their own self gratification. The only purpose for placing their pornography where children would be assaulted by the pornography was to attract attention to and for themselves. The kind of ‘look at me’ attention grabbing behaviour one would expect from the 5 and 6 year olds Van Maren and acolytes assaulted with their pornography attention grabbing display.

    Van Maren and those who helped him perpetrate his harmful and abusive treatment of the children should be charged with child abuse and have their names placed on the appropriate local, provincial and national registries of Child Molesters.

    James W Breckenridge

    dedicated to nonconformity and creative maladjustment

    Reply
18. 

    Mike Archer

    June 14, 2011 at 7:24 am

    Charlie Henslow Says:
    June 14th, 2011 at 12:12 am e

    It seems to me that men like Jonathan and Leo really have some strange sexual fascination with the whole topic. Within 3 seconds of reaching their abortionno.org website you are greeted with a close up video of a woman’s vagina being repeatedly penetrated. Maybe if their church would loosen up about regular porn they wouldn’t be driven to this stuff.

    http://www.abortionno.org/jonathans-favorite-porn-video

    Kind of reminds me of the church elders’ insistence not too far in the past that they examine an alleged witch’s private parts for “proof” before having her killed. They too claimed to be doing God’s work.

    Reply
19. 

    Mike Archer

    June 15, 2011 at 7:05 pm

    Submitted on 2011/06/14 at 12:41 pm

    Leo Says:
    Mr. Breckenridge is clearly a conspiracy theorist… If abortion was illegal, and pro-abortionists were rallying to make it legal, (which is the opposite of what is happening in this situation) he would be questioning and criticizing the pro-abortionist. He has way too much time on his hands and should find something useful to do.

    Reply
20. 

    Mike Archer

    June 15, 2011 at 7:06 pm

    Submitted on 2011/06/15 at 6:59 pm
    The world isn’t divided into pro-abortionists and anti-abortionists Leo. It’s one of the logical fallacies of Johnathan’s childlike antics that people have been trying to point out ever since he started parading his filth on our streets. Mr. Breckenridge, on the other hand, who thinks before he speaks, has contributed some of the most thoughtful and intellectually honest comments to the debate so far instead of reducing everything to simplistic bifurcation and name-calling.

    Reply