Government of Canada buys into misinformation about Crisis Pregnancy Centres

According to a recent ATIP I did, the government of Canada says that Crisis Pregnancy Centres:

disseminate abortion myths to pregnant individuals in crisis...Research by XXXXXX (probably Joyce Arthur) and colleagues of the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada (2023) has consistently found that in presenting information, these groups fail to explicitly disclose their religious agenda and anti-abortion sentiments. CPCs spread false medical information...

For the record, I and others have consistently found that ARCC's reports are full of misinformation and disinformation. (see links below for these rebuttals)

My ATIP to Health Canada:

"What evidence does the Public Health Agency have to issue a warning that "Crisis pregnancy centres ... often look like clinics or support centres, but they are designed to discourage people from getting an abortion"? Also please provide me with your evidence that Crisis pregnancy centres "are designed to discourage people from getting an abortion" (emphasis added)

The government of Canada has also posted statements on their official websites based on these untruths.

From Health Canada's website:

Crisis pregnancy centres

Crisis pregnancy centres are usually run by anti-abortion organizations. They often look like clinics or support centres, but they are designed to discourage people from getting an abortion. (emphasis added)

From the department of Finance we have this statement:

concerns have been raised that some registered charities that offer reproductive health services to women, including pregnancy options counselling—and that are provided federal supports under the tax system—may be spreading misinformation by presenting themselves as a neutral, full-service pregnancy support service organization, when they are in fact anti-choice organizations that push women away from accessing the reproductive care of their choice. By concealing the true nature of their services, these organizations, known as crisis pregnancy centres, are restricting the rights of vulnerable pregnant women to choose the reproductive care appropriate to them and their circumstances...According to the Abortion Rights Coalition, there are about 157 anti-choice crisis pregnancy centres in Canada, of which 90.5 per cent are operated by registered charities. (emphasis added)

My ATIP identifies ARCC's reports that spread myths about Crisis Pregnancy Centres, and all of these reports are used as the government's "evidence" against CPCs. These myths have been refuted many times. Yet still the lies are spread and our Canadian government buys into them. The ATIP also references studies from the United States, based on the American experience of CPCs, which of course have nothing to do with the Canadian experience, so these references can be and should be ignored.

Did the government of Canada make any effort at all to read the reports that refute the mythical allegations of the pro-abortion idealogues? There is not one word in the ATIP that would confirm that they did.

Below are the links the government of Canada has chosen to ignore about Crisis Pregnancy Centres preferring to take the word of the pro-abortions.

Part 1 - Pro-abortion report - anti-Christian hate speech?

Part 2 - Pro-abortion report - uses US experience of PCCs

ABORTION RIGHTS COALITION OF CANADA DECEITFUL ON CRISIS PREGNANCY CENTRES A Critique to ARCC’s “Review of Crisis Pregnancy Centre Websites in Canada”

October 2022 Pregnancy Care Centres in Canada:  A Necessary Rebuttal 

Crisis Pregnancy Centres In British Columbia A Respectful Rebuttal to a Disrespectful Report 

CPCs a target for calumny -- they won't refer for abortion refutes this Crisis Pregnancy Centers in Canada and Reproductive Justice Organizations’ Responses (Li references the Abortion Rights Coalition numerous hit jobs on CPCs. Of course she does.)

Slides from ATIP repeating the misinformation and disinformation from the pro-abortion ARCC

The Cart Access Project from a slide show: Page 413 Beware of Fake clinics...Crisis pregnancy centres ... actively mislead patients (For the record CART received tax payer funding of $4,387,931).

 

The pro-deathers continue to lobby government

It's been an active month for the death cult to lobby government. Yesterday it was Joyce Arthur. Two weeks ago it was Dying with Dignity.

Yesterday it was Action Canada for Sexual and Reproductive Rights. They Lobbied: Zoe Royer, Member of Parliament | House of Commons

They want more funding for abortion in Canada and globally.

Action Canada for Sexual Health and Rights

---

Occurred: 2025-11-28

Details Regarding the Identified Subject Matter

Subject matters	Details
Budget, Education, Federal-Provincial Relations, Foreign Affairs, Health, Housing, Immigration, International Development, Taxation and Finance	Discussions with government (department TBD) to discuss policies and programmes that would increase access to abortions for people in Canada and globally. This could include requests for funding related to supporting abortion access, proposed regulations and proposed legislation.

A reminder of just some of their funding from the Lobbyist database. They've received millions more.

Action Canada for Sexual Health and Rights 

---

Registration: 11 of 11 (2025-06-30 to present)

End date of the last completed financial year: 2024-06-30

List of Government Funding

Government Institution	Funding Received in Last Financial Year	Funding Expected in Current Financial Year
Global Affairs Canada (GAC)	$4,105,402.00	Yes
Health Canada (HC)	$1,561,024.00	Yes
Indigenous Services Canada (ISC)	$50,000.00	Yes
Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC)	$419,369.00	Yes
Women and Gender Equality (WAGE)	$0.00	Yes

Joyce Arthur lobbies for more abortion in Canada

Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada (as in, the pro-abortion Joyce Arthur) is lobbying seven government departments)

She wants:

• To improve abortion services (as if we need more abortion in this country)
• Funding abortion to be forced onto clinics (So Canadians could spend even more of their tax dollars on killing children in the womb)
• Private member bills that oppose abortion should not be allowed (This would make Joyce Arthur's world perfect)
• Stop funding to pro-life groups (they already get no funding)
• Remove charitable status to pro-life groups (I guess Arthur wasn't happy when this didn't happen in the recent budget. I'd like to see pro-abortion groups like Action Canada for Sexual Health and Rights lose their funding and their charitable status. Now that would be something worth lobbying for.)

---

Registration: 16 of 16 (2025-12-16 to present)

Federal Government institutions who will be communicated with

---

• Canada Revenue Agency (CRA)
• Finance Canada (FIN)
• Health Canada (HC)
• House of Commons
• Justice Canada (JC)
• Prime Minister's Office (PMO)
• Women and Gender Equality (WAGE)

Health

Access to abortion services, with respect to improving them and removing political and other barriers, especially in undeserved areas.

Policies or Program

Constitutional Issues, Federal-Provincial Relations, Health

Canada Health Act - enforcing against Ontario and other provinces that do not fully fund abortions outside hospitals, and ensuring equitable access to abortion in every region of Canada.

Policies or Program

Constitutional Issues, Justice and Law Enforcement

Lobbying against any private member bill or motion that could impact reproductive rights or access.

Legislative Proposal, Bill or Resolution

Employment and Training, Taxation and Finance

Policies or Program: Stopping federal government funding of anti-choice groups, including through job programs and their charitable tax status.

Policies or Program, Regulation

Fraser Health buckles to pro-abortion rhetoric

Dear Fraser Health,

I was very disappointed to learn that Fraser Health has decided not to partner with Hope for Women. I see that Joyce Arthur and other pro-abortion advocates have poisoned the well by convincing you that Pregnancy Care Centres are horrible places. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Arthur has been spreading disinformation about these centres for many years now. I have written extensively on refuting the fabrications of Arthur, probably as long as she has been spreading them.

Arthur argues that saying you can't refer someone to an abortion service “is disingenuous". Ah, no. It's because the values of these centres prohibit them from referring for abortion. In any event, women do not need a referral for abortion, they can get one whenever they want, and Arthur knows this.  

Arthur also insists on calling these centres "fake clinics", a derogatory term that actually means nothing except to Arthur. And horror of horrors, pregnancy centres use scary words like “hope”, “life” or "beginnings”. 

These centres do amazing work but have to continually put up with the myths spread by Arthur.

Women in Canada can get an abortion at any time during pregnancy, for any reason or for no reason, all paid for by the taxpayer. Abortion advocates also get millions and millions of dollars every year to ply their abortion ideology on the public. In fact just this week the federal government announced another $13 million for abortion. Action Canada for Sexual Health and Rights (formerly Planned Parenthood) is the top recipient of this taxpayer largesse.

Guess how much money Pregnancy Care Centres get from the government? Zero, Zilch, Nada. No millions for them.

So dear Fraser Health, it is really too bad you will not partner with a Pregnancy Care Centre. You are missing an amazing opportunity.

Sincerely,

Patricia Maloney

Joyce Arthur receives a $20,000 government grant

Joyce Arthur's lobbying of Government continues. Posted Feb 2, 2025 on the Lobbyist database.

And apparently she received $20,000 from The Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council

Joyce Arthur continues to lobby government

It will be interesting to see once Pierre Poilievre becomes Prime Minister how effective her lobbying efforts will be.

(Posted on Lobbyist database between these dates: 2025-02-20, 2025-02-20)

Government institutions

• Finance Canada (FIN)
• Health Canada (HC)
• ustice Canada (JC)
• 1Prime Minister's Office (PMO)
• Canada Revenue Agency (CRA)
• House of Commons
• Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC)
• Women and Gender Equality (WAGE)

ATIP to Finance: revoking charitable status to Pregnancy Care Centres Part 5

Here is my review of the first half of my recent ATIP to Finance. 

I wrote about the second half, here, here, here and here.

This first half contains many references to US statues and US information discussing ways to go after Crisis Pregnancy Centres. It appears that the government was looking for something they could hang their coat on, to justify allegations of misinformation coming from pregnancy care centres. I guess they knew that there was nothing in Canada that helped their case. And any comments made on these statutes were redacted.

And of course, there were more letters from Joyce Arthur. Arthur writes a lot of letters to the government. They were included. 

I've counted the number of exclusions it contains. There are 270 of them.

Section 20 12 times

Section 19 14 times

s.17 62 times

s.19 10 times

Section 69 86 times

s.69 27 times

Section 23 10 times

s.16 49 times

So here's the thing. Why don't we just get rid of the Access to Information Act altogether? I am dead serious. Anything of substance in my request is redacted or withheld. So why do we keep pretending that the Act is working? It is not.

This ATIP took 19 months for me to get information back. Clearly a lot of bureaucrats spent a lot of time reading documents, and making sure nothing of substance was revealed. What a waste of time for bureaucrats. What a waste of time and money, especially for tax payers.

Or, we could make access to information real and allow information to be disclosed. As in, stop redacting and excluding information that the client is looking for. Stop pretending that the Access to information is a real thing. It is not.

Joyce Arthur's libelous attacks on Pregnancy Care Centres

There would be massive repercussions to Pregnancy Care Centres and other pro-life charities if they were to lose their charitable status. From Pete Baklinski:

"Over 40 percent of our country’s registered charities advance religion. If these 32,000 religious charities — including churches and religious-based groups which operate soup kitchens, shelters, refugee homes, and food banks — were to suddenly lose their charitable status, they would be forced, according to Canadian law, to pay a revocation tax, which is predetermined to be equal to 100 percent of the value of the organization’s remaining assets."

All their assets. Poof. Gone. Pure evil. 

And this from a recent interview Rabble did with Joyce Arthur, the lobbyist who has been lobbying the government for years with her unfounded attacks on Pregnancy Care Centres. All emphasis added:

"Originally we were looking for a way to stop CPCs in general from getting charitable tax status maybe revoking status from those that already had it. In the end we actually took a softer line and ARCC was lobbying the government about this for many years....how it went is that the bill would have to transparency disclose whether or not they would provide abortion or contraception and they would have to do that in a very clear way, all their pubic facing material, clients on phone etc. and really we were just calling for them to be honest you know the way they always claim to be honest, so like what's the problem, right? We were calling their bluff in a sense. So it wasn't about saying oh if a CPC misinforms, then you are going to have your charitable tax status revoked, the route we tried to go but it became too difficult because how do you determine what is misinformation and whose science is correct and all that kind of stuff and that's not a job for the CRA right? 

And apparently the CRA lawyers and the finance lawyers who looked at the solution requiring them to disclose properly sort of gave the thumbs up and said we can manage this, i.e. if there is a charter challenge to this law we can defend it cause we wouldn't want the law thrown out of court for being unconstitutional so I think it was a really good compromise in that sense, it would have worked and not really any grounds for the anti-choice groups to complain about it because calling on them to be honest like they claim to be, so it was just too bad that it got dropped..."

"They deliver with a big dose of biblical morality. If you're going to pretend to provide care to pregnant people, the least you should do is provide accurate information. Guilting them, shaming them, scaring them, and confusing them, all these really negative things, which are all totally opposite to the way good patient care should go."

Arthur is a master at misinformation and disinformation as she continues her hideous attacks on these centres. You would think the government would verify Arthur's false claims before bowing to her unrelenting hatred of all things pro-life.

ATIP to Finance: revoking charitable status to Pregnancy Care Centres Part 4

So what evidence did I find of "misinformation" from Pregnancy Care Centres in this ATIP? Well, none so far. (I've only looked at the the second half of the ATIP).

On page 73 we have an example of "misinformation" provided by Joyce Arthur. This can be safely ignored as Arthur's evidence of Pregnancy Care centres misinformation has been refuted many times.

Then there is this statement by the NDP; can also be safely ignored because it's just the NDP parroting Joyce Arthur.

Pages 199-282 are US legal cases on "misinformation".  

So there are lots of pages of attempts to justify "misinformation". There are lots of redacted information. The government is clearly looking for reasons (and doing cartwheels) to get ammunition to persecute and target pregnancy care centres for "misinformation". But other than Joyce Arthur and NDP MPP Leah Gazan's claims of misinformation, I could not find any actual evidence or proof of Canada's pregnancy care centres indulging in "misinformation".

Joyce Arthur: Justin Trudeau's closest advisor?

"Hon. Marci Ien (Minister for Women and Gender Equality and Youth, Lib.):  

    Mr. Speaker, our message is clear. The right to an abortion and access to abortion go hand in hand, yet there are a growing number of anti-choice pregnancy crisis centres that use deceptive tactics to deter women from making informed decisions and to make choices about their reproductive health. (emphasis added)

     That is why today I introduced a motion to require more transparency from these centres providing pregnancy counselling. Organizations that do not clearly or prominently provide this information to clients risk losing their charitable status. This is about holding them accountable. This is about supports on which women can rely."

I am tired of the untrue allegations and misinformation that pours out of Liberal mouths and pro-abortion advocates regarding crisis pregnancy centres. My many ATIPs show zero evidence to support these false allegations that Pregnancy Care Centres use 'deceptive tactics'. Joyce Arthur seems to be the source of this misinformation, as she writes obsessively and incessantly to politicians about her flavour of the month abortion causes, and Pregnancy Care Centres are at the top of her list. Her witch hunt against these centres started in 2010 when she received a $27,400 grant to write a horrific report slandering these centres that help women through crisis pregnancies. 

Arthur's fabrications have been rebutted time and time again by myself and by others, but she keeps repeating them. And Justin Trudeau and his pro-abortion MPs are more than happy to parrot Arthur.

https://run-with-life.blogspot.com/2024/02/canadian-government-cant-justify-its.html

https://run-with-life.blogspot.com/2024/06/unredacted-atip-reveals-abortion.html

https://run-with-life.blogspot.com/2022/12/i-understand-that-liberal-party-is-pro.html

https://run-with-life.blogspot.com/2022/05/atip-reveals-no-records-to-support.html

https://run-with-life.blogspot.com/2022/06/liberal-forward-for-everyone-liberal.html

Notice Marci Ien's use of the derogatory term 'anti-choice' to refer to pro-life people. Marci, your bias is showing.  

Blind guides all of them.

Top 25 largest, wealthiest, worst pro-death groups in Canada

Compare and contrast pro-death charities with pro-life charities.

I looked at 25 pro-death Canadian charities. On average, they depend on government grants for 69% of their revenue. Their receipted donations ($3,880,807) only amount to 7% of their revenue. They received $39,239,005 in grants, or an average of $1,569,560 per charity.

I looked at 15 pro-life Canadian charities. Pro-life charities on average depend on government grants for only .33% of their revenue and depend on 65% of their income on receipted donations ($14,699,109). (Only three of the 15 actually received government funding.) They received a total of $73,558 in grants for those three charities.

(NOTE: all charities also receive revenue from Non-receipted donations, Gifts from other registered charities, and other revenue).

In other words, the pro-deathers probably wouldn't be in the death business at all, if they were not so heavily dependent on government grants. It is a very lucrative business to be in the killing business. Tax dollars literally flow into your income statement by the millions, thanks to Justin Trudeau and his support for abortion and MAID. And I'm not talking about the millions and millions used to do the actual killing part for abortions and MAID deaths. No, I am only talking about the government grants to those who promote/advocate/celebrate the killing.

Pro-death charities

Pro-life charities

Thanks to these very lucrative government grants, the pro-deathers push their killing agenda which also includes attacking pro-life charities. Kind of sickening isn't it?

Definition of a charity: "Your organization's purposes must fall within one or more of these categories

• advancement of education
• advancement of religion
• certain other purposes that benefit the community in a way the courts have said is charitable"

So where does killing people fit into those three categories?

There's no stopping Canada's euthanasia lobby

Another ATIP.

Dying with Dignity is in the business of promoting the killing of people through euthanasia. This is why they exist. In 2023 they joined with Dr. Anvita Dixit and Joyce Arthur to write a report Exploring the impact of belief-based denial of Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) on those seeking services: A multi-methods qualitative study in Canada. The study is focused on conscientious objection, which is a huge problem for those in the euthanasia business. If doctors are allowed to follow their consciences and or, not provide an effective referral to kill their patients, less people will be euthanized. 

This study received a $25,000 grant. Here is an excerpt of DWDC's letter to SSHRC explaining their participation in this study:

"We aim to establish foundational information about effects of “conscientious objection” that can serve as a baseline for other projects and future research. Our goal is to publish at least one peer-reviewed journal article on belief-based care denial of MAiD to motivate further research both in Canada and abroad to determine the extent of harms caused to patients by this practice. Further, we anticipate that the research undertaken as a part of this grant will inform DWDC’s evidence-based advocacy strategy dedicated to limiting or prohibiting belief-based care denial in general. This grant will further the understanding of “conscientious objection” from uOttawa’s and ARCCs current SSHRC-funded study on belief-based care denial of abortion and contraception." (emphasis added)

Imagine any sane person talking about the harms caused by conscientious objection?

Joyce Arthur's ARCC is even offering a $40 Amazon gift certificate for participants in the study. 

DWDC's Helen Long and Kelsey Goforth will devote their time on an in-kind basis of $12,500 to the study. DWDC will pay this in-kind donation; it will not come out of the pocket of Helen Long who earned between $200,000 and $249,000 in 2023.

The euthanasia business, just like the abortion business, is all about the money.

To know more about DWDC's agenda including euthanasia for mental illness, listen to Jonathon Van Maren's recent interview with Canada's expert on euthanasia, Alex Schadenberg.

Pro-abort gets tax dollars to promote reproductive justice

F.L. Jessica Ball from the University of Victoria wrote a paper with Joyce Arthur, and received $28,792 in government funding from SSHRC to do it: Abortion Attitudes and Access: Building A Canadian Framework for Reproductive Justice.

I couldn't find the report published on-line (why isn't it on-line?) but I did receive the report in an ATIP I did to SSHRC.

The pro-aborts want to progress from reproductive rights (mentioned 31 times in the report) to reproductive justice (mentioned 73 times in the report). Must be important.

A couple of key fabrications in the report.

• The author states three times in her tax-payer funded report, that there is a Charter right to abortion. There is no Charter right to abortion in Canada.
• The author states that Pierre Poilievre has been rated as pro-life by Arthur's ARCC. Pierre Poilievre has publicly stated he is pro-choice. Nope. Not pro-life.
• The author references a study by Laroche and Foster on pregnancy care centres in Ontario and their 'deceptive tactics'. This study was done in 2015 but the public can't see it unless they want to pay for it. In any case, since then there have been volumes written debunking this infamous pro-abortion myth.
• The author states "They [ARCC] is a charitable organization". No it isn't.
• This is interesting. According to the report: "The University of British Columbia’s Contraception and Abortion Research Team (CART) was awarded $3.8 million from the Government of Canada to develop resources for underserved populations seeking abortion and to establish a national training platform for healthcare professionals, focusing on destigmatized and contextually appropriate abortion care (University of British Columbia, 2023)." But the grants and contributions database does not report this funding. Why not?
• The author uses the phrase 'pregnant person' 15 times. Everyone knows that only women get pregnant.

I wonder if a pro-life researcher could receive $28,792 to write the report Why do the pro-aborts keep getting millions of dollars and we get zero dollars?

Joyce Arthur: lobbying, grants ($78,792) and brothels

It's common knowledge that Joyce Arthur advises the government on all things pro-abortion revealed through numerous ATIPs that I've done. (i.e. her lobbying to remove funding for summer jobs program for pro-life groups, her relentless attacks on Pregnancy Care Centres, which began with her $27,400 government grant to write a witch hunt of a report against pregnancy care centres, to name just two examples)

Here are a few other examples of her lobby efforts to government:

1) From this government document Family-centred maternity and newborn care: National guidelines, under a chapter on Loss and Grief, they actually refer to Arthur's Why women have abortions. The document is supposed to be about maternity and newborn care, and all of a sudden we're talking about why women have abortions. Why is the government referring to a pro-abortion document from Arthur when the government document is supposedly about family centred maternity and newborn care? 

2) Joyce Arthur's 2021 election spending of $9,984.00. Most of the money went to salaries for her and her pro-abortion friends. More pro-abortion lobbying during an election.

https://www.elections.ca/fin/oth/thi/advert/tp43/TP-0100_ecr.pdf

3) Next we have Joyce Arthur advocating for four brothels at the 2010 Olympics. I am not kidding. Thankfully saner heads prevailed when the Conservative government said that it was

"not in the business of legalizing brothels" 

and would not approve the initiative.

https://www.securitepublique.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/wntr-gms-2010/index-en.aspx#s6a

4) Joyce Arthur the lobbyist: From here you can see that she received funding of $11,000 in 2023 from SSHRC. 

When I did an ATIP on this to Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC), I was told that

"Joyce Arthur did not receive funds from SSHRC. Joyce Arthur was listed as a collaborator on a Partnership Engage Grant (PEG) and a Knowledge Synthesis Grant (KSG)". 

But I was unable to find which grant she was collaborating on for this $11,000 amount. I'm waiting for a clarification from the ATIP office.

I did find three other SSHRC grants where Arthur was a collaborator or a partner. Notice that the first one is with Dying with Dignity the pro-death lobbying group.

1) Exploring the impact of belief-based denial of Medical Assistance in Dying (MAiD) on those seeking services: A multi-methods qualitative study in Canada (emphasis added).

2) Exploring the impact of belief-based denial of contraceptive or abortion care on those seeking services: A multi-methods qualitative study in Canada (emphasis added)

The pro-deathers are getting government grant money to target belief based (read Christian) non-acceptance of killing children in the womb and old sick people. I can tell you why Christians don't believe in killing people in one short sentence. You don't need $50,000 to figure it out. Just ask us: Killing people is wrong, evil, unethical and immoral.

3) Abortion Attitudes and Access: Building A Canadian Framework for Reproductive Justice 

What kind of stupidity is this? We have so much freaking 'reproductive justice' in this country with the pro-aborts already getting gazillions of dollars in government funding, plus fully funded free on-demand abortions, that now they just have to come up with new and ridiculous made-up reasons to get more tax-payer money to fund their pro-death ideology. Welcome to Canada.

CTV misleads Canadians on late-term born alive abortions

 "A popular, misleading claim about late-term abortions has made its way to the province."

This comes from the very first line of a CTV article about late-term abortions, live birth abortions in Alberta.
https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/misleading-late-term-abortion-claim-circulated-alberta-government-won-t-comment-1.6986876

"That's just inflammatory propaganda that has no basis in fact," Joyce Arthur

These children are born alive after a failed abortion. Then they die. Not propaganda.

The only misleading item here is this CTV story. There's nothing misleading about these born alive abortions. They happen. Every year. In Canada. In every province. Not just Alberta.

I have done extensive research on these abortions and they are performed in all provinces. My research goes back to 2012. But the media refuses to believe it apparently.
http://run-with-life.blogspot.com/search?q=Born+alive&max-results=20&by-date=true

The stats come from the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI). CIHI took over the publishing of abortion stats from Statistics Canada years ago when they didn't want their name associated with underreported abortion numbers that they were forced to publish. 

These abortions happen. Former MP Maurice Vellacott contacted the RCMP years ago about them and the RCMP refused to investigate.

It's time to stop these horrific abortions. Wake up Canada.

Truth, lies, love and hate

It's Holy Week. The week before Jesus is crucified and dies to save man from his sins. 

“Pilate asked him, ‘So you are a king?’ Jesus answered, ‘You say that I am a king. For this I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who belongs to the truth listens to my voice.’” — John 18:37

"What is truth?” retorted Pilate. 

I've been thinking about truth. And I've been thinking about lies. I've been thinking about love. And I've been thinking about hate. Do we build up? Or do we tear down?

Joyce Arthur of the Abortion Rights Coalition, spends a lot of time writing letters and petitions to politicians, accusing other groups of hate. 

In just one ATIP, ARCC's letters (and ARCC's followers' comments) to the Finance department use the word 'hate' 47 times when speaking about these other groups. Arthur alleges that these groups are 'hate groups', and therefore should have their Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy (CEWS) funding revoked. That's a lot of pages of very serious allegations against groups who support the sanctity of life.

What is truth? A very important question indeed.

Profiting from your abortion

When someone gets an abortion, because they say they can't afford to have a child, then proceeds to make money from that abortion, I have a problem with this. This is what Rachel Cairns did.

Cairns tells her story via her podcast and website about her abortion in particular, and all things "reproductive rights" in general. She also has a one man stage show talking about said abortion. 

Cairns also interviews Joyce Arthur on her podcast, repeating Arthur's pro-abortion talking points as if they are somehow credible, especially when it comes to Arthur's vitriol and hatred for pregnancy care centres. In other words, Cairns buys into the dissemination of misinformation and fabrications about these centres.

Finally, Cairns has this to say when someone asked her if she was going to have somebody on the podcast from the other side, as in, a pro-life person:

”Should we even bother arguing with them? Should we even give them airtime? Or feed the narrative that abortion is up for debate?" 

The irony here is clear. Cairns quotes Stephanie Gray Connor extensively on her podcast. But she clearly has no intention of debating someone like Gray Connor. “Not up for debate” to Cairns really means "I don't want to look like a fool if I debate her, because I would lose". It's difficult trying to defend the killing of a child in the womb, especially in a debate. So no. The pro-abortions do not want a debate on abortion.

So how much money has Cairns made from the abortion she had because she couldn't afford to have a child? So far she has pulled in $106,000 from the federal and provincial arts councils. This does not include dollars from the Toronto arts council (which hasn't been reported yet, but we know she got a grant because her website says so).

Ontario Arts council:

2022 Cairns, Rachel, Toronto, $14,500

2020 Cairns, Rachel, Toronto, $9,000

Canada Council for the Arts: $82,500

Total of $106,000

Choice quotes from Rachel Cairns:

"I also didn’t decide to get pregnant, so in that sense, this was fairly straightforward: just-a-ball-of-cells kind of abortion. A simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ question: to be or not to be a parent."

"There was a parasite inside my body"

ARCC lobbies government against pro-life charity

Joyce Arthur and her Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada (ARCC) are registered lobbyists. I wondered. What kind of lobbying are they doing?

So I submitted an ATIP to Employment and Social Development. What I found out was shocking but not surprising. It seems that ARCC is having big feelings--writing to two different ministers and the Prime Minister--that a pro-life organization received a paltry $3,362 in 2021 through the Canada Summer Jobs program (when I checked I saw that they actually received $3,383 in 2022). 

Let's compare that to what another charity--the pro-abortion charity--Action Canada for Sexual Health and Rights, received in 2022 in government funding: $3,003,355. That's 888 times as much as the pro-life charity received.

ARCC apparently didn't like that a pro-life charity received this miniscule grant. Because ARCC demanded of ESDC, that this charity:

• Does not receive any Canada Summer Jobs funding this year
• Is permanently disqualified from receiving CSJ funding in the future
• Is required to repay the CSJ funding they received in 2021, due to violating program requirements as their mandate and primary activities are to oppose human rights including reproductive rights

I don't believe one needs to comment on these demands made by ARCC. Other than they are both ridiculous and petty.

The pro-life charity paid out a total of $3,455 in salaries for two part-time employees. That's a $1,727.50 salary per employee, which was covered by this itsy-bitsy, teeny-weenie grant the pro-life group received. For comparison purposes, Action Canada for Sexual Health and Rights's total compensation paid to employees that year was $2,175,492, five of whom made between $80,000 and $119,999, and five of whom made between $120,000 and $159,999. The $3,003,355 received by Action Canada in government funding, would have more than covered these exorbitant salaries, with almost a million left over to use to promote their pro-abortion agenda.

Lobbying the government is one thing. But for a pro-abortion group to lobby the government against giving a pocket-change sized grant to a pro-life charity is pretty low even for a pro-abortion group. 

Replacing objective reality with subjective reality

In response to my last blog on Dying with Dignity (I always cringe when I repeat those words--how can you die with dignity when someone kills you?) below are some comments I received from Fr. Tony Van Hee. With Fr. Tony's permission I post them below.

"It seems to me that it [the paper] is rife with wokeism, in the sense that it replaces objective reality with subjective reality.

 

They define "the relevant type of harm as the subjective experience ...", and "one's subjective well-being ... as one of the central justifications for MAID", in their "argument from harm reduction." 

 

Although they use the word subjective only once in the rest of the article, namely, "Trusting a person with a disability's subjective reports ... (p. 4, top para, column b.), their whole concept of autonomy is subjective.

 

As long as their is a semblance of "meaningful", "self-determination", "hope", "self-governance", "choice", "option", "self-trust", self-worth", "what one cares about", "what matters to them", "agency", autonomy not being "entirely undermined", "capacities and self-regarding attitudes", "the ability to understand, appreciate the consequences of their choice, the capacity to value, the ability to reflect on the values guiding their decision, as well as the attitudes of engaged hope, self-worth and self-trust", "the 'most salient dimensions' of autonomy ... competency and authenticity", etc., etc., as long as there is a semblance of any of these, regardless of unjust social conditions, these persons have sufficient personal autonomy to choose to have themselves killed by MAID. 

 

That is replacing objective reality with subjective reality.

 

In regard to being deceived "under the guise of good," I refer to Ignatius' Rules For Discernment Of Spirits II, 332:

 

"It is a mark of the evil spirit to assume the appearance of an angel of light. He begins by suggesting thoughts that are suited to a devout soul, and ends by suggesting his own. For example, he will suggest holy and pious thoughts that are wholly in conformity with the sanctity of the soul. Afterwards, he will endeavor little by little to end by drawing the soul into his hidden snares and evil designs."

 

I find this very relevant to these industrious and determined people, such as these two authors, and Joyce Arthur.

 

Ultimately, we are really up against Satan, and we are no match for his cunning.

 

In my opinion, our only hope is to be able to expose his cunning by the discernment of spirits. 

 

I know for a fact that even very intelligent good people, faced with the same facts, can come up with directly opposite conclusions.

 

There has to be something other than reason by which we decide what is true and what is false.

 

The only tool I, personally, have is the [St. Ignatius of Loyola's Spiritual Exercises] discernment of spirits. I don't know of any other reliable tool.

 

329 of the above rules helps me:

 

"It is characteristic of God and His Angels, when they act upon the soul, to give true happiness and spiritual joy, and to banish all the sadness and disturbances which are caused by the enemy.

 

"It is characteristic of the evil one to fight against such happiness and consolation by proposing fallacious reasonings, subtilties, and continual deceptions."

 

"Fallacious reasonings, subtilties, and continual deceptions" are what I experience when I read Joyce Arthur, these authors, and others like them."