Subscribe

To receive our free monthly newsletter,
Please enter your email address

CLC Blog
Patrick Craine President, CLC Nova Scotia

Now’s the time to unite behind Woodworth’s motion

The date is set: On Sept. 26th Woodworth’s motion to reconsider the humanity of the unborn child faces a decisive vote. If it gets 50% of MPs behind it, then it moves to committee. If not then it dies.

So now’s the time for a final push to lobby our MPs, and get friends and family to do the same.

Write your MPs, the Prime Minister, and Justice Minister Rob Nicholson, preferably by mail but e-mail if necessary. See the links for contact info. Visit your MP if possible or give him or her a call.

It’s important for you to make contact yourself. But then you need to encourage your friends and family to do it too.

Share this blog post on Facebook and Twitter with a note encouraging your contacts to take action.

When you’re writing your MP, consider the following talking points:

• Canada has had no law regulating abortion since section 251 of the Criminal Code was struck down by the Supreme Court in 1988. Despite the fact that the court called on Parliament to enact a new law, it’s been nearly 25 years.
• Canadians are woefully unaware that Canada lacks an abortion law, but when told, they clearly don’t support the status quo: An Abacus Data poll in May 2011 found that 59% of Canadians want some form of restrictions on abortion.
• Canada’s failure to act on abortion is in violation of our international agreements. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which Canada has ratified, calls on governments to “provide legal protection before as well as after birth.”
• Woodworth’s motion is merely calling for a close examination of the scientific evidence supporting or opposing the humanity of the unborn child. Clearly our politicians want to base our laws on solid evidence, so it would seem fitting to give it a close look.

Since the motion is to examine the scientific evidence, it’s also worth noting that embryologists and other scientists who have no vested interest in the public debate have been clear that life begins at conception.

Here are some compelling statements by experts you might consider using, taken from Randy Alcorn’s ProLife Answers to ProChoice Arguments:

• “The [single-cell zygote] results from fertilization of an oocyte by a sperm and is the beginning of a human being.” – Dr. Keith L. Moore, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 2nd Edition.

• “From the moment of fertilization, that is from the earliest moment of biologic existence, the developing human being is alive, and entirely distinct from the mother who provides nourishment and protection. From fertilization to old age, it is the same living human being who grows, develops, matures and eventually dies. This particular human being, with his or her characteristics, is unique and therefore irreplaceable.” – Dr. Jerome Lejeune, consider the “father” of modern genetics

• “By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception.” – Prof. Hymie Gordon, Mayo Clinic

• “It is incorrect to say that biological data cannot be decisive. … It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception. Our laws, one function of which is to help preserve the lives of our people, should be based on accurate scientific data.” – Prof. Micheline Matthews-Roth, Harvard University Medical School

Finally, consider Stephen Woodworth’s main talking point: “Don’t accept any law that says some human beings are not human beings!”

Now, the obvious question on all our minds is: what chance does the motion have of passing?

Stephen Woodworth himself apparently has low expectations. Asked by Macleans, he said, “I really can’t say for sure, but I am not optimistic that it will even approach 50% unless there is a sudden resurgence among Members of Parliament of a commitment to the ideal of universal human rights.”

But that doesn’t mean we should back off. Not at all. Obviously Woodworth himself hasn’t – he’s still travelling the country talking up the motion.

Of course our ultimate goal is to pass strong pro-life legislation but even if we’re not ready to do that yet, our political efforts are crucial to educating the public and our politicians. Every new motion or bill keeps the issue in the public consciousness and ensures our nation never forgets the horror perpetrated under our very noses.

And we can at least be right in our own conscience, knowing that we did all we could.

Now go write your MP!

 

Comments
By: Jean Stephanson
August 30, 2012 @ 1:17pm
Conservatives seem to care a great deal about zygote cells. If and when the zygote further develops into a fetus and eventually into an infant, the Cons lose all interest. They certainly do not care whether the mother has good health or no wish to bring another child into the world due to financial restrictions. They do not care if her job pays her a livable wage. They don't care about the millions of children living in poverty in Canada; kids whose parents are underemployed or unemployed. How can you do that? How can you care so much about that clump of cells, and not care one iota about the real, live woman who has to deal with the pregnancy? Why don't you admit this whole thing is just bowing to the Republicans in the USA who want to step back 200 years in their restrictions for women?. Like the Taliban, the Repubs and the Canadian Cons want to relegate women to some subservient status. Good luck with that in 2012!
Please, if you want to be reelected, vote AGAINST this silly motion. Have a spine. Show that you live in this century and believe in the rights of women!
By: Miles
August 30, 2012 @ 4:11pm
Thank you Patrick. Great to see that you haven't given up on M 312! Just so you are aware there is a growing movement supporting Motion 312. It is poised to be the greatest pro life uprising Canadian parliament has ever seen! To join the ranks visit www.pass312.webs.com and www.facebook.com/pass312
By: Campaign Life Coalition
August 30, 2012 @ 7:27pm
Dear Jean, thanks for your comment. However there is a fatal flaw in your underlying assumption. A zygote or embryo is a human being. Yes, a very small human being, but a human being nonetheless. It is an undisputed biological fact that the zygote is an individual being who is alive and is of the human species. Not a fish species, not a plant species. Not a mere skin cell. Its rights derive from what it is - a human being. Not from its size, location, or level of dependence on others. Secondly, you throw out accusations that "Conservatives" don't care about born children nor women. Presumably you are directing this attack against Stephen Woodworth, whom you probably don't know. What evidence do have to prove your allegation that Mr. Woodworth doesn't care about born children? (Btw, he raised children of his own). What evidence do you have that he doesn't care about women? (Btw, he has been happily married to a woman for decades).
By: Glenna Miles
August 30, 2012 @ 11:33pm
Once again a movement to strip women of the use of their own brains and wombs is being pushed forward in Canada. Once again the arguments begin over when does one become a 'human being'. Once again we have to educate the public about who is living and breathing and what is not. The influence of the dark ages is trying to force women to carry a pregnancy, against their will, to suit someone else's idea of when 'life' begins. This pressure is no different than a women being forced to have an abortion because someone/government thinks she should. One coin, intervention, two sides. Women who can decide every other aspect of lives do not need a repressive regime telling them how to manage their childbearing skillset. Doctors, lawyers, teachers, women of any church with cash, nurses, scientists, women of all races, ages and intelligence deserve to be respected in the choices they make. In various states of the US the effort to force women to breed is inhumane, undemocratic, dangerous to the women,and sheer idiocy in action. I can see the lawyers lining up now to challenge against the cases of miscarriage, spontaneous abortion, accident of injury causing the loss of a foetus, etc. Would you have women register with a Breeding program and have spies check up on her to see if she is still being productive? Will you call her before a tribunal to explain what happened, charge her with murder for not protecting the cell/zygote/foetal structure within her with her life. Will every menstruating women become a victim of some Inquisition charged with 'finding out' if she is breeding at any given point in her cycle? Will her neighborhood nosy parkers watch her every move and report if she 'doesn't look right'? Please refocus on the living , breathing children as they are born onto this earth. There is more than enough to concern us all about their health and welfare without imbueing special 'rights' onto a potential human being who may never be here for any number of reasons. None of which are any of your business.
By: Campaign Life Coalition
August 31, 2012 @ 7:56am
Dear Glenna, your comment appears to be a whole lot of fear-mongering with no substance, and contains a scientifically ignorant foundation. You said the child in the womb is a "potential human being". Sorry, but the science is settled. It's an actual human being. The growing developing being has its own, unique DNA, the same as you and I. Science is undisputed that this being is living, growing and of the human species. The argument you made to classify some human beings as non-human based on arbitrary characteristics such as place of residence (i.e. the womb) has been tried before with tragic consequences. Blacks were classified as non-persons based on the arbitrary characteristic of skin colour selected by the pro-choicers of that age, despite the clear scientific evidence that black people were human beings.
By: Chris
August 31, 2012 @ 11:55pm
Thank you for all the hard work you are doing on behalf of the most vulnerable humans of our country. Your great work does not go unnoticed. Keep it up! I know I will.
Add Comment
Required (not shown)
Required

Required