Discriminatory bubble zone law 'not in the public interest'

The charges against Fr. Tony have been dropped. Good. But they never should have happened in the first place.

'Bubble zone' law constitutionally challenged

“Our position is the legislation is such a serious Charter breach that it should never have been available to prosecute a man in his 80s peacefully carrying out his priestly duties, and protesting legislation that effectively amounts to anti-blasphemy laws,” Polizogopoulos said. “Just its attempt to outlaw ‘discouraging language’ on a public street in the nation’s capital — or anywhere in Canada — seems to exemplify what the courts have defined as legal overreach.” ... 

..."On the day he was arrested four years ago, Van Hee was deemed to be within the 50 metre legal “bubble zone” around the Morgentaler clinic on Bank Street.He held signs that read: “The Primacy of Free Speech: Cornerstone of Western Civilization” and “Without Free Speech the State is a Corpse.” 

He was subsequently charged with intimidation or attempted intimidation. The single initial charge was later dropped and replaced by two charges of “inform(ing) or attempt(ing) to inform a person concerning issues related to abortion services, by any means, including oral, written or graphic means,” and “perform(ing) or attempt(ing) to perform an act of disapproval concerning issues related to abortion services, by any means.”"

Fr. Tony's charges were a witch hunt. I have been with Fr. Tony when he holds that sign--a sign that does not even mention abortion. Charged with 'intimidation or attempted intimidation' is a joke. Fr. Tony is the least intimidating person I have ever met. He surely did not 'inform anyone concerning issues relating to abortion'. How could he? He never speaks to anyone about abortion when he sits there quietly holding his sign, and his sign said nothing about abortion.

In fact, if a person of the pro-choice variety, with purple hair and a ring through their nose and carrying the same sign, they would never have been arrested. Fr. Tony was arrested because he was a Catholic priest protesting the freedom of speech that this law violates. Everyone knows Fr. Tony is pro-life, so that just ticked off another of the check boxes that makes him a perfect a scapegoat for this Charter violation law that only targets pro-life people most of whom are Catholics or Evangelical Christians.

Fr. Tony's Charter Challenge against this discriminatory law goes ahead. Thank God for that.

Update on donations for Fr. Tony's constitutional challenge

1) Cheques may be made payable to Philip Horgan in Trust, and sent to:

Philip H. Horgan Law Office
301 - 120 Carlton Street
Toronto  ON  M5A 4K2

2) Online donations can be made here:

https://www.wonderwe.com/helpfrvanhee

Positive news on Freedom of Speech Charter Challenge

The Catholic Civil Rights League has joined Fr. Tony Van Hee in his constitutional challenge to Ontario's bubble zone law, Bill 163, Safe Access to Abortion Service Act.

As well, Dr. Jordan Peterson mentioned Fr. Tony's case in his June 10th newsletter when he referenced the recent article in the Ottawa Citizen on Fr. Tony's case:

OTTAWA CITIZEN - KELLY EGAN

Charged priest uses charter freedoms in strike at abortion bubble-zone law

"He is 83, tiny and, in the eyes of the law, a threat."

JBP: "Bubble Zone." Where the laws of the Dominion no longer apply?

It does seem to be the case as sad as that seems--that Canadians are forced to go to court to protect their freedom of speech rights.

As we already know, Fr. Tony's text for his signs were inspired from Jordan Peterson's talk at the Ottawa Public Library on March 11 or 12, 2017.

Here is something Fr. Tony wrote about his work for the Interim back in 1996. It is still applicable today:

"Randall Terry, founder and leader of Operation Rescue, prisoner for Christ and the child in the womb, along with Joan Andrews Bell, Linda Gibbons and all pro-life prisoners of a conscience, are such powerful witnesses.

A small but essential key to such outstanding service, however, is simply showing up “for work” each day.

If I’m not in my place when the right moment [comes] along, God has to wait for another right moment. 

As Mother Teresa said, I’m not asked to be successful, but to be faithful. “Paul plants, Apollo waters, but God gives the increase.” Faith, fidelity, courage, perseverance, are my part.”

"O my Jesus, You do not give a reward for the successful performance of a work, but for the good will and the labor undertaken. Therefore, I am completely at peace, even if all my undertakings and efforts should be thwarted or should come to naught. If I do all that is in my power, the rest is not my business. And therefore the greatest storms do not disturb the depths of my peace; the will of God dwells in my conscience." [Divine Mercy In My Soul, the Diary of St Faustina Kowalska, Marian Press, Stockbridge, Massachusetts, #952.]"

All posts on Fr. Tony's case here.
Donations are still being accepted for Fr. Tony's case here.  

The right to life and the right to free speech

From the Christian Heritage Party of Canada:

Dear Members and Supporters of CHP Canada / CHP Hamilton Mountain

Next to the Right to Life what can be more important in a nation than the Right to Freedom of Speech?  Without this right we cannot publicly scrutinize public policies or those who may have an agenda to bring harm to Canadian citizens. Yet increasingly we are witnessing attempts by government at various levels to shut down free speech.  This is a very dangerous trend.

CHP Hamilton Mountain has approval for 3 bus shelter ads to be placed on the Hamilton Mountain for the month of May (see sample image).  In addition to the bus shelter ads we also plan to produce flyers (see attached) and distribute them to homes in the area of the bus shelters and beyond.

The estimated cost of this ‘Free Speech Matters’ campaign is $1850 which includes 1500 flyers but we need people to partner with us. Currently we are appealing for funding partners.

Remember that donations to CHP Hamilton Mountain are considered political donations and as such up to 75% of your donation (provided you pay taxes) is refundable on next year’s tax return. So a $100 donation can cost you as little as $25 or a $50 donation could cost you only $12.50.

Please, at this time consider partnering with us financially by sending a cheque made out to ‘CHP Hamilton Mountain’ and on the memo line add ‘Free Speech Matters’.

Please mail your cheque to:

CHP Hamilton Mountain 

P.O. Box 30028

1599 Upper James Street

Hamilton Ontario

L9B 0E4

We need to sign the contracts for the Bus Shelter Ads by mid-February and so we ask you to please consider responding very soon.

Thank you so much

Jim Enos 

CEO

CHP Canada, Hamilton Mountain

The Christian Heritage Party of Canada

chphamiltonmountain.ca

Priest challenges Safe Access to Abortion Services Act

Fr. Tony Van Hee has retained constitutional lawyer Albertos Polizogopoulos to represent him against a ticket he received last Wednesday at the Ottawa Morgentaler abortion site.

Fr. Van Hee received the ticket last week for his silent witness in front of the abortion facility in Ottawa under the "Safe Access to Abortion Services Act Section 3(1)(e)(iii)". You know the one. Where Jim Watson got an Ontario law enacted by Kathleen Wynne's Liberals to prevent people from using their constitutional right to free speech? Yes, that one.

According to the ticket, Fr. Van Hee committed the offense to "intimidate or attempt to intimidate the person".

It's kind of hard to intimidate someone when you are across the street, looking away from the abortion site, holding signs that say absolutely nothing about abortion:

"The primacy of free speech - cornerstone of western civilization - without free speech the state is a corpse"

They really do want to shut us up don't they?

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Polizogopoulos won my own freedom of expression case against those same Wynne Liberals, and more recently a court challenge for the Christian Heritage Party.

Fr. Van Hee will have to appear in court on Nov 16, 2018.

I know who I'm rooting for. And it isn't Jim Watson.

What does the Ontario NDP party REALLY stand for?

I sent the email below to the NDP candidate in my riding Lyra Evans, along with NDP leader Andrea Horwath.

I noticed that one of the anarchists who blocked our March for life was carrying an NDP election sign for Lyra Evans. The sign is clearly visible in the video below.

The stated intention of these counter protesters--many of them cowardly covering their faces--was in fact to "End the March for Life". They carried a banner stating this at the front of their sorry bunch.

In fact, if I'm not mistaken, in the picture in this article by Jonathon Van Maren on the March, it looks like NDP candidate Lyra Evans is actually holding that anti-democracy sign. That also contains a hammer and sickle. 

 From the Ottawa Citizen

As Jonathon writes on what the hammer and sickle actually represents is pretty scary:

"The Soviet Union wracked up a death toll of over twenty million, with nearly two million people perishing in the gulags and nearly a million being summarily executed in the first years of Stalin’s rule. Mao’s Red China took it even further, with an estimated 45 million Chinese perishing during the Great Leap Forward—which was actually fewer dead bodies than Mao had been anticipating. He originally thought that 52 million peasants would have to die in order for Communism to be sufficiently implemented. The flag that flapped over these staggering death counts was the Hammer and Sickle, a flag now proudly waved by those purporting to protest totalitarianism."

Is this what Andrea Horwath and her party stand for? A ban on free speech rights, freedom of assembly rights for pro-life people--and maybe even worse? I hope not.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Lyra,

I live in Ottawa Vanier.

I noticed at the March for Life there was a counter protester with one of your election signs. This group's purpose is to end the March for Life, a legal, peaceful protest done against abortion in Ottawa every year.



This group illegally stopped our March from continuing.

Can you please tell me if you support freedom of speech rights, and freedom of assembly rights for all citizens including pro-life people?

Thank you.

Patricia Maloney

Abortion bubble zone - to Ottawa city council

Dear City of Ottawa Councillors,

From: Patricia Maloney 
Date: Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 4:10 PM
Subject: Run with life: Abortion bubble zone - law of unintended consequences

To: diane.deans@ottawa.ca, Marianne.wilkinson@ottawa.ca, "Nussbaum, Tobi" , "Watson, Jim (Mayor/Maire)" , jeff.leiper@ottawa.ca, jan.harder@ottawa.ca, Mathieu Fleury , catherine.mckenney@ottawa.ca, Bob.Monette@ottawa.ca, jody.mitic@ottawa.ca, Eli.El-Chantiry@ottawa.ca, Shad.Qadri@ottawa.ca, Mark.Taylor@ottawa.ca, Rick.Chiarelli@ottawa.ca, Keith.Egli@ottawa.ca, Tim.Tierney@ottawa.ca, River Ward , David.Chernushenko@ottawa.ca, Jean.Cloutier@ottawa.ca, Stephen.Blais@ottawa.ca, George.Darouze@ottawa.ca, Scott.Moffatt@ottawa.ca, Allan.Hubley@ottawa.ca, Michael.Qaqish@ottawa.ca

I just thought that you'd like to know the effect your abortion bubble zone is having on pro-life people, especially Catholics. 

Your discrimination against us, is having the opposite effect of what you intended. What it means is that we are making more of an effort to go to the abortion site and pray there.

Sincerely,

Patricia Maloney

Abortion bubble zone - law of unintended consequences

There is an interesting side effect to the abortion bubble zone law. Because of this law, I am far more inclined to go and pray at the abortion facility in Ottawa. We were there again today. We even prayed for Kathleen, Patrick, Justin and Jim.

Mind you, as you can see, they have the entrance to the abortion facility covered up with scaffolding and boards. And there's no construction going on there so what's up with that? Clearly they've done that to prevent us from "observing" the place. And as you know we aren't allowed to "observe" the abortion facility. No. No. No.

Just to make sure I didn't accidentally "observe" the abortion facility, I observed this instead:

Yes. I'm pretty sure I will now be visiting the abortion facility a lot more often now. To pray. For the women; that they will choose life for their pre-born children. For our politicians; that they will stop taking away our rights. For the abortion doctors; that they will stop performing abortions. And all of these prayers are a very good thing indeed.

Abortion bubble zone goes after Catholics: we are in the world we are not of the world

From LifeSite News:

"Ontario’s legislators passed a bill criminalizing pro-life speech and expression outside abortion clinics today by a vote of 86-1. 

MPP Jack MacLaren, a member of the Trillium Party, cast the sole dissenting vote. 

PC Conservative MPPs Sam Oosterhoff, Monte McNaughton and Rick Nicholls were not in the House for the vote."

This morning my sister Maureen and I were scheduled to pray at the abortion facility on Bank St.  We went as planned. We prayed the Rosary. Another lady joined us from Our Lady of Fatima parish. The three of us prayed the Divine Mercy Chaplet.

We made sure we didn't "observe" the abortion facility because that is now illegal. I "observed" the ground in front of me.

None of us "observed" the abortion site.

Heck the birds started singing when we were praying.

Fr. Raymond de Souza calls it secular fundamentalism.

It's amazingly hypocritical that Jim Watson is speaking out against the Niqab ban in Quebec but is perfectly fine with banning Catholics from being at the abortion site.

"In his letter dated Tuesday, Watson pointed out that Ottawa residents regularly use public services across the Ottawa River. 

"I am saddened that, in doing so, they will not enjoy the same freedoms as they do in Ottawa," Watson wrote...  

"...I sincerely hope that, with the opportunity for reflection, your government will abandon what can only be described as a thinly veiled appeal to populist sentiment, in light of the divisive effects."

"They will not enjoy the same freedoms as they do in Ottawa"? 

"Thinly veiled appeal to populist sentiment, in light of the divisive effects"?

Does Watson have a clue as to the hypocrisy and irony of what he's saying? Maybe Watson should do some "reflecting" of his own. In fact it was Watson who instigated this anti-free speech bill. 

Please email Kathleen, Patrick, Nasir and Jim and tell them what you think of this anti-freedom, anti-Catholic, and anti-free speech bill.

kwynne.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org
ynaqvi.mpp@liberal.ola.org
patrick.brown@ontariopc.com
jim.watson@ottawa.ca

Abortion bubble zone goes after Catholics - part 2

From the Catholic Civil Rights League (CCRL):

• The CCRL’s opposition to Bill 163 focuses on the following:
• The government has failed to identify or address any need for the intrusion and limitation into the constitutional right to freedom of expression
• The bill’s penal sanctions are an intrusion into the federal power over criminal law, and present a lowering of the thresholds typically required to constitute the offence of “harassment” under the Criminal Code
• All parties by their support of the bill are engaging in political suppression of dissenting viewpoints, with the invention of the need for broad areas of “no go” zones, the total effect of which (conceivably, bubble zones around all pharmacies in urban areas), the bill engages in overreach to impose its dubious objectives

This is what Catholics won't be able to do anymore: Pray peacefully and silently at the abortion facilities across Ontario. 

Please sign the petition. 

Then send an email to Attorney General Yasir Naqvi, Premier Kathleen Wynne, PC leader Patrick Brown, and NDP leader Andrea Horvath telling them to respect our freedom of conscience rights, freedom of religion rights. freedom of assembly rights and freedom of expression rights.

kwynne.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org
ynaqvi.mpp@liberal.ola.org
patrick.brown@ontariopc.com
ahorwath-qp@ndp.on.ca

Abortion bubble zone goes after Catholics

Don't kid yourself. This new bubble zone legislation isn't about the supposed harassment that goes on at abortion facilities by pro-life persons. It's about discrimination against Christians.

And we have Strawberry Social Jim Watson to thank for this stupidity.

We already know that there is no need for a bubble zone. My FOI on police reports at 65 Bank Street revealed no assaults where a charge was laid.

This is what the bubble zone will do:

3 (1)  While in an access zone established under section 6 for a clinic or facility, no person shall,  (a)  advise or persuade, or attempt to advise or persuade, a person to refrain from accessing abortion services;  (b)  inform or attempt to inform a person concerning issues related to abortion services, by any means, including oral, written or graphic means;   (c)  perform or attempt to perform an act of disapproval concerning issues related to abortion services, by any means, including oral, written or graphic means;  (d)  persistently request that,           (i)  a person refrain from accessing abortion services, or          (ii)  a protected service provider refrain from providing, or assisting in the provision of, abortion services;  (e)  for the purpose of dissuading a person from accessing abortion services,           (i)  continuously or repeatedly observe the clinic or facility or persons entering or leaving the clinic or facility,          (ii)  physically interfere with or attempt to physically interfere with the person,         (iii)  intimidate or attempt to intimidate the person, or         (iv)  photograph, film, videotape, sketch or in any other way graphically record the person;   (f)  for the purpose of dissuading a protected service provider from providing, or assisting in the provision of, abortion services,           (i)  continuously or repeatedly observe the clinic or facility or persons entering or leaving the clinic or facility,          (ii)  physically interfere with or attempt to physically interfere with the provider,         (iii)  intimidate or attempt to intimidate the provider, or         (iv)  photograph, film, videotape, sketch or in any other way graphically record the provider; or  (g)  do anything prescribed for the purpose of this clause.

Notice this clause:

(i)  continuously or repeatedly observe the clinic or facility or persons entering or leaving the clinic or facility,

I am not kidding. You cannot OBSERVE an abortion facility.

Are Kathleen and friends serious? The only "observing" I've ever seen done at the abortion facility is when people stand across the street silently praying and "observing" said abortion facility. Which Catholics do. Which I have done. Which I will do. During this year's 40 days for life. And at other times. You can't do that. Anymore.

What about my religious right to say the rosary? Is that banned too? Is that what Kathleen and friends have in store for us next?

I'm not even talking about the gross trampling this law will have on our rights to freedom of speech, freedom or assembly, freedom of conscience and freedom of expression.

This is a sneaky witch hunt against practicing Catholics. Of course the Liberals are good at sneaky. They wrote the book on sneaky.

Will the leader of the opposition Patrick Brown speak up for us? I doubt it.

The freedom to hear what people have to say

Excellent article by Andrew Potter on free speech that tells us that the real importance of free speech is not so much the freedom to speak (though that is important), but the freedom to hear what others say:

"...We got here because the problem is with the way we framed the question, as a debate over the benefits of free speech and the consequences we are willing to tolerate. Instead, what we should be focused on is the right of people to hear what others have to say, and how this fits into a broader account of individual freedom.

What’s the difference? If you turn the free speech debate on its head and treat it as a right to hear what someone has to say, the constitutional rationale for it becomes a lot clearer: The right to hear or read something and judge its worth or merit for yourself is the basis for being treated as an equal, rational and autonomous agent. We shield things from children precisely because we don’t think their rational faculties are sufficiently well developed. They don’t know how to evaluate something by their own lights. That’s why a big part of parenting is bringing kids along the path to autonomy, teaching them to judge and think for themselves.

Hearing what people have to say and judging its merits for yourself is the mark of being an adult. And part of being an adult is having the right to make mistakes, to make bad judgments or decisions, and take responsibility for what follows. 

It just so happens that a society made up of autonomous individuals making independent rational judgments about what others have to say is the basic condition for the possibility of a liberal democracy. The fact that so many people, on the right and the left, are willing to have their right to hear limited by governments, universities or even social media mobs, is a further sign of the relentless infantilization of our culture — and goes a long way toward explaining the current crisis of liberalism."

This was the core issue with our charter challenge. Our pro-abortion government under Kathleen Wynne, didn't want pro-life people like myself to discuss anything related to abortion in Ontario. Like numbers of abortions, policies about abortion, etc.

They wanted to shut us down and changing the law seemed like a genius and simple way to do it. Their logic--though they would never admit to this--was that if we don't have the information then we can't talk about it. So they made up specious reasons about safety which were ultimately shot down by the facts and actual logic.

In the end their tactics were neither genius nor simple.

How pro-choice people get it wrong

Dear Heather Mallick,

Last week in the Toronto Star you wrote a story about an abortion protester outside the Morgentaler clinic in Ottawa. You think abortion protesters are "creepy, some unwell, and some threatening". You make all sorts of nasty unproven allegations in your opinion piece.

Cyril Winter's responded to your article here when he called into Mark Sutcliffe's radio show. Winter says he doesn't spit on anyone and doesn't speak to anyone unless he is spoken to. He says he is peaceful.

Dear Carol Anne Meehan,

You believe that people who peacefully protest outside abortion clinics are "religious fanatics" (as you said to Mark Sutcliffe on 1310 news radio on Friday). 

To both of you I would like to say this. We have rights in this country called freedom of speech and freedom of assembly and freedom of religion. In a democracy these rights are given to us all--and this may shock both of you--but these rights are even given to pro-life persons. When we encounter injustice to pre-born human beings we protest, we speak, and some of us may even depend on our religious beliefs to peacefully act thus.

You seem to think that pro-life people do not care about the women who have an abortion. You could not be more wrong. If this is what you honestly believe you have no idea of what being pro-life is all about.

Sincerely,
Patricia Maloney

Freedom of speech: winners win, losers suppress

George Jonas is not talking specifically about abortion in this article; rather about freedom of speech issues at Queen's University.

Yet his comments are applicable to the abortion debate in general, and in particular, to what happened recently with Mark Warawa's Motion 408 being killed two weeks ago.

All of Parliament went into top-down, lock-down mode, on freedom of speech rights when this happened.

The following is the discussion Mr. Jonas had with his father:
"Assume you come upon a bitter dispute,” I remember saying to my father many years ago, “with the two sides ready to kill each other.”

“Okay,” my father said, “so far it’s easy.”

“Assume further,” I continued, “that you have no inkling what the dispute is all about, and the more people try to explain it to you, the less you understand it. How can you tell who is right?”

Father thought you couldn’t, not for sure, anyway, without understanding the issues, but you could still take a pretty shrewd guess. “See which side is trying to stop the other from speaking,” he said. “That’s the side that’s likely to be wrong.”

“Wrong to do it or wrong on the merits?”

“Both,” father said. I still remember it. It’s not foolproof, but it’s a pretty good rule of thumb. Show me someone who silences or censors another, and I’ll show you someone with a losing argument. Winners win, losers suppress — that’s how the game plays out most of the time. Except, of course, if the losers suppress successfully, the winners lose."

The politically correct pro-choicers in this country, including most MPs and the Prime Minister, don't want us to talk about abortion. They don't want us talking about abortion in Parliament. They don't want us talking about abortion in the Universities.

They don't want us talking about abortion period.

Of course that doesn't mean we won't talk about abortion. We will. They can try and suppress us but they can't. Because the pro-abortions only have losing arguments.

Canada's any-time any-reason no-reason tragic abortion reality that nobody knows about

Today we learn that Few Canadians know rules on abortion, poll finds

No shaving cream Sherlock. Tell me something I don't know.

Last year the Parliamentary Pro-Life Caucus had a press conference to discuss this very topic. There was no mainstream media present at said press conference. This resulted in no media coverage, except one lonely letter in the Ottawa Citizen.

Below is the PPLC Chair Rod Bruinooge's press release at that time, followed by my letter.

The ad mentioned in the press release:
9 Months the length of time an abortion is allowed in Canada

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Immediate Release
May 13, 2009

Pro-Life Free Speech Suppressed in Canada

(Ottawa) - "In the last 12 months we have seen an alarming increase in the number of cases where pro-life groups have had their free speech suppressed," said Rod Bruinooge, Chair of the Parliamentary Pro Life Caucus (PPLC). "What do opponents of the pro-life viewpoint fear?

"Each year, the multi-party Pro-life Caucus holds a press conference in conjunction with the National March for Life.* This year's March marks the 40th anniversary of the 1969 Omnibus Bill which decriminalized abortion in Canada.

The pro-life caucus will use this opportunity to highlight a disturbing trend of intolerance towards the pro-life point of view. "From student unions and campuses, to advertising regulators, pro-life free speech is being treated by some as unworthy of protection," Bruinooge said.

One particular case involved LifeCanada, after they coordinated a national billboard campaign with the message "Nine Months, the length of time abortion is allowed in Canada." The Advertising Standards Canada body ruled that the advertising was "deceptive," and LifeCanada was banned from using that ad among all of the major advertisers that this body serves. "It is unfortunate that we are unable to communicate the truth to Canadians that abortion is permitted in all 9 months of pregnancy," said Gudrun Schultz, executive director of LifeCanada.

On campuses around Canada there are a number of cases where pro-life clubs have been denied club status and where pro-life students have been shouted down, prevented from speaking, been the subject of "thought police" inquiries, or have been arrested for trespassing.

"Polls consistently show that a majority of Canadians do not support Canada's unrestricted tax-payer funded abortion regime," Bruinooge said. "And although there are close to 100,000 abortions every year in Canada, we actually know very little about the practice. For example, we don't know the gestational age of the unborn child in over 60% of the cases because abortion providers aren't required to report this information. Nor are they required to report health complications or the reasons women obtain abortions. Stifling free speech allows the whole secrecy surrounding the practice of abortion to thrive."

Bruinooge continued, "Every woman has a right to be fully informed about the potential physical and psychological health risks of abortion. The trend to clamp down on free speech on this issue is a threat to all women who seek to be adequately informed."

Bruinooge concluded, "Student unions attempt to censor pro-lifers; school campuses attempt to censor pro-lifers; advertising bodies attempt to censor pro-lifers; but one place where freedom and democracy are still valued is the Parliament of Canada. It doesn't surprise me that our opponents attempt to suppress pro-life messages, because the truth is powerful.

"The PPLC press conference will be held Thursday, May 14, at 11:00 a.m. in the Charles Lynch Press Theatre (room 130-S Centre Block).

- 30 -

For additional comment, please contact:Rod Bruinooge, MP(204) 984-6787* The National March for Life is an annual event organized by Campaign Life Coalition and draws thousands of people to Ottawa from across the country every year in support of the lives of preborn children, the health of women, and the strength of families.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pro-life free speech was suppressed
The Ottawa Citizen May 21, 2009

Re: Thousands hit Hill to protest against abortion, May 15.

I attended this year's pro-life rally on Parliament Hill for the first time. I saw the thousands of people, but I sure didn't see much media presence.

In the Citizen's news story, the statement that there has been "snickering" at the Parliamentary Pro-Life Caucus' "secretive" reputation in the mainstream media is really kind of silly.

Every year the pro-life caucus holds a press conference at the same time as the rally. A media advisory and a press release went out to the Ottawa Press Gallery before the conference.

Perhaps if some members of the media could have taken a few minutes out from their laborious duties of their round-the-clock coverage of Larry O'Brien's trial or Brian Mulroney's inquiry, they would have had a few minutes left over to cover the Pro-Life Caucus's press conference and rally.

They would have learned something, like who some of the Pro-Life Caucus members are, as many of them attended at the press conference.

Publishing the names of members of a caucus is not normal caucus protocol -- it's up to members to self-identify if they wish.

It's ironic that the subject for this year's press conference was "pro-life free speech suppressed in Canada."

Now that's an understatement.

With the press's little to no coverage of the pro-life rally or caucus press conference, this all seems like a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Patricia Maloney,

Ottawa
© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

The Globe and Mail is speaking out for freedom of speech in defence of Ann Coulter's right to say what she thinks at the University of Ottawa.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/editorials/would-be-prior-restraint/article1510057/

I agree wholeheartedly.

The Globe's editorial stated that "Mr. Houle's e-mail warning, in advance of her scheduled talk last night, is offensive on any number of levels, not least for the national platform it has given Ms. Coulter. Mr. Houle's outline of possible legal ramifications, the worrying implication that free speech in Canada is carefully circumscribed, in effect government-regulated, and his finger-wagging admonition to maintain 'respect and civility,' militate against the sanctity of free expression in places of higher learning and serve to embarrass his institution."

But wait a minute. I just googled to see if I could find similar Globe editorial support in defence of freedom of speech for pro-life groups on university campuses, many of whom have been shut down and/or have lost their funding or their club status as of late. I couldn't find anything.

The University of Victoria, McGill in Montreal, the University of Calgary and York University immediately come to mind.

In fact, a lot more pro-life university clubs have had their freedom of speech rights threatened, than the lone Ann Coulter.

Interesting that. Could it be that the "sanctity of free expression in places of higher learning", is only defend-able some of the time, and for some people?

I'm just saying.