There is [still] no Charter right to abortion in Canada

From Canadian Lawyer Magazine:

"Jennifer Taylor argues Canadians can’t trust the Tory leader on his promise to avert the anti-abortion movement"

In her article, Ms. Taylor repeats the urban legend that there is a Charter right to abortion in Canada. I responded to her article with my own letter.

Here is that letter:

Dear Canadian Lawyer Magazine,

I recently read this piece in your magazine by Jennifer Taylor. I must comment on this article, in particular, Ms. Taylor's opening paragraph below.

"It’s been 50 years since abortion was partly decriminalized in Canada, and 31 years since R v Morgentaler, the Supreme Court of Canada decision that struck down the remaining Criminal Code restrictions. Surely, in 2019, Canadians have accepted that there is a constitutional right to abortion access in this country, and abortion is a publicly funded health care service – not a subject for debate. We’ve moved on. Right? Unfortunately, not."

I take issue with Ms. Taylor's comments, for two reasons.

In one breath Ms. Taylor invokes the constitution, which guarantees freedom of religion, speech and conscience. In her next breath, she states that abortion is not up for debate. This appears to me to be a serious disconnect from both the spirit and the letter of our Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. I posit that in a democracy, everything is up for debate. Even abortion.

Secondly, and this point is as important as the first, is the simple fact that there is no constitutional right to abortion in Canada. Abortion advocates have been pushing this myth for some time now but it simply is not true.

I refer you to an in-depth analysis of the Supreme Court Morgentaler decision: .

"Contrary to what many Canadians think, the Supreme Court of Canada, in its landmark 1988 Morgentaler decision striking down Canada’s abortion law, did not recognize a constitutional right to abortion. Nor did the Court “settle” the abortion issue as is often claimed. Rather, the Court left it to Parliament to come up with a new abortion law that would balance the rights of women with the state’s interest in the protection of the fetus, without offending the Charter."

This analysis goes into great detail about what the Morgentaler did say, and what it did not say.

Clearly the Supreme Court did not resolve the abortion issue in 1988, but left it to Parliament to come up with a new law--which Parliament did not do. In fact, the Court was unanimous in also finding that the state did have an interest in the protection of fetal/unborn human life.

CHIEF JUSTICE DICKSON (AND JUSTICE LAMER CONCURRING):
Like Beetz and Wilson JJ., I agree that protection of foetal interests by Parliament is also a valid governmental objective. It follows that balancing these interests, with the lives and health of women a major factor, is clearly an important governmental objective.” (R v Morgentaler at page 75) 

JUSTICES MCINTYRE AND LA FOREST (DISSENTING OPINION):
Historically, there has always been a clear recognition of a public interest in the protection of the unborn and there is no evidence or indication of general acceptance of the concept of abortion at will in our society. The interpretive approach to the Charter adopted by this Court affords no support for the entrenchment of a constitutional right of abortion. (R v Morgentaler, at p. 39)

There is no constitutional right to abortion in Canada. Parliament is exactly the place where a new law, can and should be debated, and where fetal protection can and should be provided. Just as the Supreme Court of Canada advised.

Debate in Canada--a free, democratic and highly educated country--should never be shut down. Especially over a topic as controversial, and as highly political, as abortion.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Patricia Maloney

Pro-abortion nasty media please shut up already

I am really really tired of listening to the sanctimonious, moronic, self absorbed abortion pushers natter on endlessly about Andrew Scheer's social conservative values.

Neil Macdonald:

"The key, he seems to think, is to claim his views on such matters are strictly personal – he is a religious man – and swear that as prime minister, he would never try bringing the land's laws more into alignment with his faith. 

As though "faith," a term treasured by social conservatives for its virtuous connotation, confers some sort of shield that licenses bigotry. 

Following that logic, a member of the Westboro Baptist Church who desires running for public office could say, "Yes, I believe GOD HATES FAGS, but that's a matter of my deeply held faith, you see, and I promise that as president I would govern for all Americans and that I would not re-open the debate on same-sex marriage."

Who exactly is the bigot here Neil?

Full disclosure. I have never met Andrew Scheer nor do I know him personally. His office did help me once when he was speaker of the house. I called his office because I was really p'd off when my rude pro-abortion MP refused to read my my pro-life petition in the House. He abruptly hung up the phone on me when I insisted--since he was supposed to represent me--that he read it in the House. So Scheer's office found another MP to read my petition on my behalf. For that I am very thankful to Scheer.

I can't speak for Andrew Scheer. But what I can do, is tell you that I am also a practicing Catholic who takes my Catholic faith very seriously. Probably like Scheer does. I believe abortion is evil. I do not believe in same sex marriage. I also believe that lying is a sin. All these values (and others) are formed from my Catholic faith.

As far as gay sex and women who have abortions go--I don't agree with either of those things. But my Catholic faith has taught me to love and respect all people, and I take that command very very seriously. My loving and respecting people has absolutely nothing to do with how I feel about their personal life situation. They are two separate things.

"And why stubbornly refuse to walk in a Gay Pride parade? Even Doug Ford has walked in a Pride parade, for heaven's sake."

It is a well known fact that there is a lot of lewdness and naked people running around at these parades. So why on earth should Scheer prance around with people engaging in obscene acts and or making fun of Andrew Scheer's own Catholic faith?

So Neil Macdonald, why doesn't Justin Trudeau march in the March for Life each year "for heaven's sake"? What's good for the goose is good for the gander n'est pas?

The anti social conservative twits who love to pounce on anyone--and especially Andrew Scheer--for his values should learn to keep their judgments to themselves. Real Catholics adhere to real Catholic values and beliefs. From everything I have learned about Andrew Scheer, he is a real Catholic.

And saying that the abortion issue in Canada is settled is total nonsense. Last time I checked Canada was still a democracy. My values are just as sacrosanct as your values.

If I were the leader of the opposition and I had to endure this stupid infantile non stop harassment about my social conservative values this is what I'd say to you:

"These are my values. They may be different than your values. If I tell you that I will not reopen the abortion debate, I will not reopen the abortion debate. I don't lie. You may not believe me. But if you don't believe me, that's your problem, not mine. I stand behind my word. I will not discuss this with you again or with anyone else. Next question please."

Do not be troubled nor disturbed by anything

Yesterday Maureen and I visited Fr. Tony at the abortion killing site. As usual Fr. Tony is there witnessing for the children who cannot speak for themselves. Witnessing for the children who are at the mercy of a Godless society that cares not for them. We do have hope though.

Fr. Tony reminded us of what Our Blessed Mother said to St. Juan Diego at Guadalupe in 1531:

“Listen, my son, to what I tell you now: do not be troubled nor disturbed by anything; do not fear illness nor any other distressing occurrence, nor pain. Am I not your mother? Am I not life and health? Have I not placed you on my lap and made you my responsibility? Do you need anything else?” (Holy card, With Ecclesiastical Approval, Our Lady of Guadalupe Abbey, Lafayette, Oregon)

Fr. Tony changed his signs. See here for his source for his new wording on his signs.

Even though we don't always understand God's ways, and why the evil of abortion is allowed, God is in control. We entrust their tiny souls to Him as we pray and witness to end abortion. This is more precious than anything the pro-abortions have, as there is nothing precious about the slaughter of these holy innocents.

More on late term, live birth abortions

When I reported 2017/2018 abortion statistics for Ontario, there were 15 abortions called S770A CORPUS UTERI - HYSTEROTOMY and S783A CORPUS UTERI - HYSTEROTOMY WITH TUBAL INTERRUPTION.

Here is the gruesome definition of these abortions taken from the SOGC Clinical Practice guidelines:

"Hysterotomy is essentially an early classical Caesarean section. With current pharmacologic agents for labour induction in pregnancy termination, the procedure is rarely indicated as a primary method of abortion. The morbidity and mortality associated with hysterotomy are far greater than for any other technique. In most cases, failed abortions are managed with parenteral, oral, vaginal, or rectal prostaglandins even in the presence of a uterine anomoly. Only after failure of the prostaglandins should hysterotomy be performed."

And from Thomas W. Hilgers, M.D., Associate Professor of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Creighton University, in testimony before the U.S. Senate Constitution Subcommittee, Oct. 14, 1981. 

"Hysterotomy is an operation like a Caesarean section in which the infant is surgically removed from the mother’s abdomen and uterus. With the hysterotomy type of abortion there is no chemical that is inducing fetal death. When the surgeon [cuts open] the uterus the baby is still alive."

Trudeau needs to prove his new found humility

Apparently Justin Trudeau is newly "humbled".

"A freshly-chastened Justin Trudeau seems to have absorbed this advice in his meetings with opposition leaders this week, acknowledging he may be able to find “common ground” with politicians he only recently assured Canadians were depriving villages somewhere of their idiots."

Okay. I'm willing to give Trudeau the benefit of the doubt. Let's say for argument's sake, that Trudeau has actually learned a lesson about playing nicely with all those people he normally shuts out of his sandbox. Like Catholics. Like pro-life people. Because up until now, every Catholic/evangelical pro-life person in Canada has been chopped liver. Up until now we know that Trudeau does not work for all Canadians. He has always excluded Catholics and pro-life people from his so-called inclusiveness. Like when he shut us out from the tax payer funded Canadian Summer Jobs Program. Like when he prevented pro-life people from holding a seat in the Liberal party.

He's never replied to any of my letters asking him why he excludes us. Including the one I sent back in 2014 that contained 416 signatures. Even after I resent the letter to him multiple times. By email. By snail mail. Rather rude I'd say don't you think? Not too humble I'd say don't you think? The word arrogant comes to mind. 

So is Trudeau really humbled? If he truly is, then he should tell us that he is he's sorry for treating us as second class citizens. That he's willing to change his tune on the Canadian Summer Jobs Program and allow us to finally qualify for grant money, that by the way, is paid for by all Canadians. Even us. Because as tax paying Canadians, we are forced against our beliefs, to pay for abortions and to pay for his billions in "reproductive choice" donations to national and international organizations. The least he can do is give us equal opportunities for funds to save babies and not kill them. Fair is fair.

We will forgive you Justin Trudeau. But first you must admit you were wrong. You need to prove to us that you are really humbled. And that you're not just faking it.