think I have calmed down. I think I can look somewhat objectively at Monday’s election results without choking. Many have opined that the Conservatives lost the election because of “fringe” opinions by candidates, especially any comments with respect to abortion. In today’s Globe and Mail, for example, columnist John Ibbitson says, “Mr. Harper must expunge the social conservatives from any position of influence.” He notes that the party will soon hold a policy convention, the first for the new united Conservative Party. At that convention, says Ibbitson, “Stephen Harper must convince Canadians that he, a western fiscal conservative, is also a socially progressive, environmentally sensitive, comfortably urban leader. And he must launch a policy process that will reflect those values, and marginalize everyone who doesn't share them.” All right, I’m beginning to choke. The Globe columnist, and he’s not alone, is recommending that anyone who supports any change to the status quo on abortion be silenced and excluded from political discourse. According to Gallup polls over the past thirty years, at least 60% of Canadians think there should be some legal restrictions on abortion. Shut ‘em up, says Ibbitson. Let’s just review the status quo on abortion. In Canada, abortion is legal at any time until birth. All provinces, except PEI, pay for all hospital abortions and Ontario, BC and Alberta pay the entire cost of private clinic abortions. There are over 100,000 abortions each year in Canada. There is no requirement for parental consent for abortions on minors. Nor are doctors or clinics, which have a financial conflict of interest, required to tell women about all documented risks, complications and side effects. Most abortions are not done for medical reasons but for personal private reasons, as Henry Morgentaler, Canada’s premier abortionist, admits on his website. "Abortions are performed when a pregnant woman requests one from a doctor and a doctor grants her request.” Rob Merrifield, a Conservative MP and the party’s health critic, told a Globe and Mail reporter that he thought women would benefit from third party counselling before having an abortion. He did not say “mandatory” but the Globe headline did. The media and several Liberal cabinet ministers immediately began shrieking about restrictions on abortion and violations of the Charter (there is no Charter right to abortion). The shriekers included former Health Minister and law professor Anne McLellan, whose campaign manager was the lawyer for the Morgentaler Clinic in Edmonton. Ontario conservative MP Cheryl Gallant was publicly abused too when she compared terrorists beheading people to the killing of babies in the womb. (I know, the Ibbitsons of Canada despise those of us who persist in calling them “babies” but they haven’t yet taken anyone to court for the use of such hateful language.) Paul Martin, the devout Catholic, called Gallant’s remarks “abhorrent.” We should recall that both Merrifield and Gallant won their ridings by large margins. So did Saskatchewan Conservative and pro-life hero Garry Breitkreuz. And, it ain’t just us rednecks here in the outback who supported explicitly pro-life candidates. Paul Steckle in Huron-Bruce, who had not been supported by the Martin Liberals, was re-elected, and according to LifeSite News, so were all but two of the outspoken pro-life Liberals. Whatever the media and political elite say, election results do not support the view that pro-life views lose votes. One additional positive during this election campaign, several Canadian bishops, including Calgary Bishop Fred Henry and Edmonton Archbishop Thomas Collins articulated clearly that Catholics, even self-described devout ones, cannot support abortion or any policy that denies the dignity of the human person at any stage of life. Whatever one’s partisan reaction is to the 2004 election, the campaign produced some good things for pro-lifers. Over the past four weeks, there have been hundreds of news stories, columns, and letters to the editor by Canadians expressing their views about abortion. Although the context of the discussion was political, the real benefit of the debate was educational. Canadians rarely hear the subject mentioned in the media. Our job now is to keep the issue in the public consciousness. |
