No results were found.
An error occurred while attempting to retrieve data. Please try again.
Please select the option to share your location in order to use the Detect My Location feature.
We were unable to detect your location. Please enter your postal code instead.
Postal code and geolocation data may not always be accurate. Please check to ensure that the electoral districts displayed below are correct.

blog posts

In cities across the country, thousands of people took to the streets yesterday to protest Canada's lack of protection for pre-born children. The theme of this year's March for Life was "End Female Gendercide" and many of the speakers focussed their remarks on this ongoing...

This article by Mike Schouten was published in the National Post on Thursday, May 2. Abortion data is difficult to find in Canada. And advocates of Canada’s laissez-faire abortion-on-demand status quo like it that way — as the lack of publicly available information makes it difficult for their opponents to build a case. Currently, two provinces (Ontario and British Columbia) have laws that serve to block the promulgation of abortion-related statistics. Indeed, as of 2010, Quebec has stopped submitting data to the Canadian Institute for Health Information. These jurisdictions ensure that any data pertaining to abortion falls outside the parameters of the Freedom of Information Act. Even pro-choice advocates should find this situation problematic. If it is true that Canadians support the status quo — i.e., Canada’s status as the only developed nation in the world without any form of abortion law — then surely they have nothing to fear by permitting the publication of relevant data about abortion, especially data pertaining to the gestational age of fetuses. A few months ago, Liberal MP Carolyn Bennett — a pro-choice advocate — wrote on her blog that she was “fed up” with the alleged misrepresentation of the abortion issue by pro-lifers. She wrote: “No physician in Canada can terminate a pregnancy over 24 weeks without serious indications such as if the life of the mother is at risk, or if the fetus has very serious malformations.” It would be nice if that were true. But we have no way of verifying the claim, and Ms. Bennett knows it. We do, however, have means to debunk that claim — albeit only via anecdote evidence.

This week in Ottawa there was a National Holocaust Remembrance Day ceremony. The event, hosted by the Canadian Society for Yad Vashem, was attended by parliamentarians from across the spectrum. Green Party Leader, Elizabeth May, spoke to the gathering at the Canadian War Museum, as did NDP Leader, Thomas Mulcair. We all know that the injustices perpetrated against the Jewish people were a terrible evil. Still, there are numerous benefits to the annual gatherings. They serve as reminders that anti-Semitism still exists in certain cultures and we need to remain vigilant in our struggle to defend our Jewish brothers and sisters. But, more importantly, they allow us to reflect on how we view other members of the human family. The darkness of evil, in whose name millions of lives were extinguished, is something a global society should never again tolerate. And yet, we know it continues in various forms. The events in Boston, as well as the thwarted attempt to blow up a passenger train, clearly indicate that we need to be on guard against those who go to great lengths to unjustifiably take the lives of fellow humans. There is, of course, a genocide currently taking place  in our country and around the world. The theme of the genocide I refer to is also intolerance and  discrimination. While some are quick to argue against the comparison pre-born human rights activists make between abortion and the Holocaust, the correlations are eerily similar.

By Mark Penninga In late September, MP Mark Warawa introduced Motion 408 in the House of Commons. It read, "That the House condemn discrimination against females occurring through sex-selective pregnancy termination." Six months later a House of Commons sub-committee ruled that M-408 could not proceed to a vote. After a failed subsequent appeal, Warawa chose to introduce a new bill rather than appeal the decision one final time. Our immediate reaction may be disappointment. What good did all of our petitions and letters do if the motion never even came to a vote, let alone passed? But step back, look at the facts, and be encouraged. M-408 has had a momentous impact on advancing pre-born human rights in this nation: 1)      Over 500 mainstream newspaper articles have covered Warawa’s motion in the past month alone! Laws don’t change overnight. First the Overton Window has to shift. It shifts as a result of awareness. In the past year we have seen the Overton Window take a full step towards protecting pre-born children, thanks largely to M-312 and M-408. 2)      The Liberal party is putting forward a motion that would give freedom to MPs to speak in the House of Commons without being muzzled by their parties. This comes as a result of the outcry after Warawa was muzzled when he wanted to defend M-408. If this passes it will make it much easier for the truth to get through the over-sensitive filters of Canada’s political parties. For those who aren’t convinced about the Overton Window theory, this is yet more evidence that once an idea shifts from extreme to popular, we can expect to see policy makers capitalizing on the popularity by making it law.

  The following is a message from Fred Henry, Bishop of Calgary. He indicates strong support for the WeNeedaLAW.ca campaign and it is re-published here with his permission. Awkward Questions About Babies Written by F. B. Henry, Bishop of Calgary on Friday, 12 April 2013 In Kia's Super Bowl ad (which we weren't able to see on Canadian television stations), a son asks his father where babies come from. The father (behind the wheel of a new Kia Sorento) is so distressed by the question, he concocts a story about how babies come from a distant planet called Babylandia. Babylandia is a pretty sweet place. Lots of greenery. Plenty of open spaces. Diapers are abundant. There are baby humans, baby ducks, baby penguins, you name it. "When the time is just right," the dad says, "there's a space launch," and the babies are sent to Earth on a nine-month journey on a big rocket. The babies "penetrate the atmosphere," parachute from the spaceship, and land with their families. If the babies are really lucky, their families have a Kia. And if the parents are smart, they've opted for a voice-controlled sound system that can drown out any other awkward questions. I don't have any comments to make about the Kia Sorento itself but the commercial really wasn't very good. Nevertheless, it made me think about babies, awkward questions, and systems that attempt to control thinking. For example, why does Canada not have an abortion law? Canada is the only democracy in the world without legislation protecting children in the womb. Twenty-five years ago, on January 28th 1988, the Supreme Court of Cnada , in the Regina v. Morgentaler decision, struck down the existing abortion law, making Canada the only western country with unrestricted abortion on demand, fully funded by taxpayers. It is estimated 2.5 million unborn children have been killed by abortion since January 1988. To drown out this vexatious question, many sound systems loudly and repeatedly shout: "The Supreme Court established a constitutional right to abortion?" It did not. Others scream: "The judgment found that any legal restriction on abortion was a violation of women's rights" It did not. Others summarily proclaim: "The abortion issue has been settled." It has not.

After decades of decline, stillbirth rates have increased steadily in recent years and seven British Columbia researchers attempted to find out why. This past week the Canadian Medical Association Journal published a new study titled, “Determinants of increases in stillbirth rates from 2000 to 2010”. While the phenomenon of stillbirth has been experienced in many Western nations, the seven researchers decided to use data from British Columbia for their study. Among other things, the main finding was that, due to advances in prenatal screening, there has been a marked increase in late-term abortions. Stillbirths are defined as the loss, either spontaneously (naturally) or through abortion, of a fetus after 20 weeks gestation or a fetus weighing more than 500 grams. The study indicates that while the overall stillbirth rate has increased by 31%, from 8.08 per 1000 total births in 2000 to 10.55 in 2010, the rate of spontaneous stillbirths had actually decreased by 16% in that same time period. This shows that late-term abortions are the sole contributor to the huge increase in the number of deaths recorded as stillbirths. The results of this study are concerning; they give us a window into what extent eugenics has become part of Western society again.

Join us in building support for these initiatives:

Subscribe