In this province, the media chose to harass Premier Frank Coleman about his pro-life convictions when they learned that he and his family participate in an annual pro-life march. The negative reaction to this revelation in many quarters surprised me.
Last year anti-abortion M.P's in the Conservative Party attempted to re-open the Abortion Debate.
Now the leader of the Liberal Party of Canada is saying if you can not vote for pro-choice bills in the House of Commons - you can not be a candidate for his party. Park your conscious at the nomination gate because the promise of free and open nominations does not apply to pro-lifers. The issue is settled.
The Liberal Party has always had a small but vocal pro-life lobby. A group of M.P's that refused to tow a partisan line on the issue of abortion. The Conservatives have an even larger pro-life lobby. Even the NDP have had candidates that are pro-lifers.
I believe that human life begins at conception, that an abortion halts a life. However, I do not believe that my religious or personal moral convictions override a women's right to determine what happens with her body. Abortion is not black and white.
I do not like Justin Trudeau's decree anymore than being told by Roman Catholic pro-lifers that I have a moral responsibility to uphold the churches stance on abortion and birth control. That supporting the law of the land and people's rights to make their own choices is wrong.
It is a line in the sand that does not have to be drawn. I find the language of some of the Catholic zealots who criticize Premier Coleman for saying he will not enforce his personal views on public policy repugnant. This does not even take into account other positions at odds with Catholic moral teaching such as supporting same-sex “marriage” and the rest of the homosexualist agenda.The concept that politicians are morally guilty of cooperating in evil and in sinning against the common good rots me to no end.
It is important to state that Catholics are called to and encouraged to participate in the political life of our Country. Even John Paul II’s encyclical Evangelium Vitae (#73), about the moral obligations and restraints on legislators would appear to allow Catholic legislators “when it is not possible to overturn or completely abrogate a pro-abortion law, an elected official, whose absolute personal opposition to procured abortion was well known, could licitly support proposals aimed at limiting the harm done by such a law…”
If legal abortion cannot be outright overturned—a legislator can support lesser initiatives or partial correctives even though they leave the norm of permissive legal abortion intact.
This is very relevant in Canada where there is no law on abortion. The House of Commons has not been able to find a consensus on the issue that will pass the muster of the Supreme Court. What we have is a void! The issue is far from settled.
Many progressive nations have laws that limit some forms of abortion, not us? What about abortions because the mother wants a child of a different sex? What about abortions in the 3rd trimester?
I just do not think the issue is black and white. The Supreme Court and the Charter of Rights will not allow governments to ban abortions. It is a reality, but preventing those for, or against, reforming abortion laws from being candidates of political parties because of their personal convictions seems wrong too.
There is plenty of room for a pro-life, pro-choice’ position.