Yes, we said the same thing following the 2004 National March for Life in Ottawa but it is true again. The gathering was the largest in the eight-year history of the event . The participants were more enthusiastic and hopeful about the future than ever before, and were much younger, with 60% of them being high school and university students. Over 500 people attended the Rose Dinner, and the Youth Conference was the best attended. Folks, any way you cut it, the 2005 March for Life was the best yet.

There were almost 6,000 people from across Canada at the March demonstrating to parliamentarians, the press and the public that Canadians want the nation’s abortion laws changed and that unborn children must be given protection under the law.

Unlike past years in which media coverage was limited, we had more local mentions. CTV’s Ottawa station ran a piece as did the Ottawa Sun. The Ottawa Citizen ran a photo of the large crowd outside Parliament, and local radio stations mentioned the demonstration. Unfortunately, neither the CBC nor the two “national newspapers” provided coverage for Canadians coast-to-coast. The CBC is especially culpable. Canada’s $1 billion annual publicly subsidized broadcaster failed to mention the March for Life despite the fact that the 6,000-strong crowd we drew was much larger than the anti-Iraq war demonstrations from 2003 that garnered just a few thousand but received endless media coverage. The “people’s broadcaster” seems to base the newsworthiness of events on whether or not the demonstration accords with their ideological preferences. (The only newspaper available across the country that has extensive coverage – any coverage! – is The Interim.)

But enough complaining – the benefits of the three days of events outweigh the blackout by many in the mainstream media. Everything was kicked off on May 11 with Mass at St. Theresa’s Church. Peterborough Bishop Nicola De Angelis presided over the ceremony. This was followed by the candlelight vigil, held just blocks away from Parliament Hill at the national Human Rights Monument on Elgin Street, which attracted about 200 pro-lifers. For the most part, the participants ignored a counter protest of some 20 rabble rousers led by Ottawa city councilor Diane Holmes.The counter-demonstrators attempted to take over the main position at the monument and had to be removed by the police. As always, the vigil was a moving witness to the violation of the rights of unborn children.

At the pro-life Mass which preceded the March the next day, Ottawa Archbishop Marcel Gervais encouraged the overflow crowd at St. Patrick’s Basilica to provide an alternative to the culture of death. Peterborough Bishop Nicola DeAngelis and Slovak Bishop John Pazak concelebrated the Mass with dozens of priests. There was also a Christian prayer service led by four Baptist pastors from the Ottawa Evangelical Ministerium.

May 12 was a glorious day – sunny with a slight wind, warm, but not hot. It was a perfect day to gather on Parliament Hill, listen to brief inspiring speeches and encouraging words before marching through the streets of the nation’s capital. Numerous pro-life MPs addressed the thousands on the Hill as did Bishop De Angelis, Deputy Supreme Knight Jean Migneault and three evangelical pastors – Robert McRoberts, William Rabey and Ramon Salgado. Tracy Clemenger, wife of the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada President Bruce Clemenger, delivered a message from her husband who was unable to attend the March.

The majority of participants were under 25 years and there were more signs from different high schools and youth groups than one could count. About a dozen MPs addressed the crowd thanking the grassroots pro-lifers for their sacrifices and hard work, calling them foot soldiers in the battle to gain protection for the unborn. It was obvious that many of them knew they are supported by loyal, dedicated pro-lifers in their own ridings. In a special surprise for the Knights of Columbus who were leading the March through the streets, Supreme Knight Carl Anderson met them along the route to march with them for several blocks.

For those who stayed after the March for the Silent No More Awareness Campaign, there was a powerful, personal witness from women and men on their post-abortive experiences; they carried signs that stated “I Regret My Abortion” or “I Regret Lost Fatherhood.” 20 people from all over Canada gave moving personal testimonies about the devastating after-effects of abortion in their lives. Canadian co-founder of the Campaign, Angelina Steenstra noted that two of the participants who joined the group at the last moment came from the gathering, one a woman from Montreal and the other a man from Ottawa.

At the Rose Dinner, attended by over 500 people, Quebec City Archbishop Marc Cardinal Ouellet said he was “very happy” to be with the gathered pro-lifers. He congratulated Campaign Life Coalition for organizing the March year after year, which, he said, “is bringing forward, little by little, a culture of life.” Cardinal Ouellet, who received repeated rounds of applause, recalled his experiences in Rome during the funeral of Pope John Paul II and, later, the Conclave that elected Pope Benedict XVI. “In Rome the population doubled and most of them were young men and women,” he said, speaking with emotion of the funeral for Pope John Paul II. “They wanted to say farewell, adieu, to this man who had stood for the gospel, the gospel of life and the dignity of the human being, a witness of Jesus Christ, one of the greatest of our times.” He said that Pope Benedict will continue the fight for life “with the same courage and determination” that John Paul had.

Supreme Knight Carl Anderson outlined the threats to the sanctity of human life not just from abortion but at the other end of life through euthanasia. He provided an informative overview of the issues that the pro-life movement, not just in Canada, but all around the world, is dealing with.

CLC also presented Conservative MP Rob Merrifield with its Joseph P. Borowski Award, given annually to the politician who most prominently upholds life and family in the public square.

At the Youth Conference on May 13, some 300 youth enjoyed invigorating music and talks from pro-life leaders including LifeSiteNews.com editor John-Henry Westen, motivational speaker Adrian Dieleman, MPs Jeff Watson (CPC, Essex) and Dan McTeague (Lib., Pickering-Ajax-Uxbridge) and CLC International Affairs director Samantha Singson. The comments from these young people demonstrated that they found their March for Life and Youth Conference experiences rewarding, educational and inspiring. Many commented on how important it was to them to know that they were not alone among their age group in their pro-life positions. No doubt they are encouraged by the knowledge that there are thousands of other like-minded young people making a stand for life and many of them exchanged email addresses and phone numbers in order to stay in contact.

The March and other events over the three days inspired thousands of pro-life Canadians and sent a strong message to our elected officials and the media about the injustice of abortion.

Organizers of the May 23 rally at Queen’s Park in Toronto say 9,000 concerned citizens demonstrated their support for marriage. (The crowd would certainly have been larger if the forecast hadn’t called for rain that holiday Monday.) The multicultural crowd heard inspiring speeches from leaders from a half-dozen faith groups and pro-family activists all of whom called upon Prime Minister Paul Martin to live up to his Catholic faith and stop trying to destroy marriage. Muslim Imam Suleiman Yacoob said of Martin, “He says he professes to be a Catholic ... and he attended the funeral of Pope John Paul in Rome. And all along Pope John Paul has been saying for a man to marry a man and a woman to marry a woman is not the law of God.” Yacoob concluded, “So again to Paul Martin – What brand of Catholicism is he practising?”

Rabbi Mendel Kaplan deplored the federal government’s push to legalize homosexual ‘marriage’ and said, “Today I ask the Prime Minister, when he placed his hand on the Bible and he swore an oath to protect Canadian values and our society, what was he thinking?” He continued, “In whose bible does he place his faith and trust if not in the bible and inalienable word of the Almighty. My friends, that very same Bible makes very clear with regard to the convention of marriage, the Torah states unequivocally ‘therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and cling to his wife.’”

Rally organizer and Presbyterian Minister Rev. Tristan Emmanuel challenged the media to cover the pro-marriage side of the debate fairly. While the next day the National Post had front-page coverage of the rally, the Toronto Star didn’t cover it at all and the Globe and Mail had only a stand-alone photograph. (The Toronto Sun had the story on page 10.) Media bias can manifest itself not only in the spin it gives stories but also in which stories it chooses to cover or ignore. Rev. Emmanuel also called upon Martin to withdraw bill C-38.

Toronto Catholic Bishop Emeritus Pearse Lacey concluded his remarks to the marriage rally saying that it galled him that Martin and other Christians were leading the push for same-sex ‘marriage.’ The audience clearly demonstrated in downtown Toronto that traditional marriage is a Canadian value worth upholding.

On May 5, Parliament gave approval in principal to the Liberal government’s same-sex “marriage” Bill C-38 in a 163-138 vote. The bill was then sent to a special committee for review. The ad hoc committee formed by the government to shepherd through C-38 is stacked by a majority of MPs who support the same-sex “marriage” legislation, and it is expected to severely limit public submissions and attempt to conclude its proceedings as quickly as possible. Once C-38 is approved by the committee, we expect that Justice Minister Irwin Cotler will move to have Parliament act on it as quickly as possible.

It is imperative that you contact your MP today and urge him or her to vote against C-38 when it returns to the full House of Commons. Politely, but firmly, inform your MPs that you will vote to defeat them in the next election, whenever it may be, if they support C-38 or are absent from the vote. If there is an election call before third reading, those MPs who voted for the bill at second reading must be defeated. Indeed, the Defend Marriage Coalition, of which we are a part, will be working together to defeat as many MPs as possible who voted for C-38.

It is important to note that 35 Liberal MPs voted against their own government on this bill. Also, 93 of 99 Tories voted against it as did seven Bloc Quebecois and the three independent MPs. These courageous MPs who stood up for marriage deserve the support of pro-family voters – they are proof that supporting candidates that are on side on these important issues is necessary if odious legislation (such as C-38 or any future legislation affecting life and family) is to be defeated.

For months we have known that Belinda Stronach, a former contender for Conservative Party leader, was trying to wrestle control of that party away from Stephen Harper and turn it into a party committed to abortion and the gay rights agenda. In short, she wanted to the turn the Tories into a clone of the Chretien/Martin Liberals as she worked with social liberals in attempting to secure nominations to become the party’s leader in the next election.

On May 17, Belinda showed her true colours and opportunistically accepted an offer from Prime Minister Paul Martin to join the Liberal government as a cabinet minister. Switching parties, she gave the government the crucial one vote margin needed to pass its budget on May 19 with Liberal MP Peter Milliken, the Speaker of the House, forced to cast the deciding vote to pass the budget and prevent the government from falling.

Unfortunately, the defeat of the government on this confidence matter was the best opportunity (not the only one, mind you) to defeat C-38, the government’s attempt to redefine marriage. Make no mistake about it, as Globe and Mail columnist John Ibbitson noted, many MPs knew that passing the budget was the only way to keep their hope of gay “marriage” alive. One can’t help but think that this might have been Stronach’s motivation for switching teams and gaining an immediate cabinet position.

Although it no longer seems imminent, we must continue to prepare for the next federal election as we have since the beginning of the year. We have worked with candidates at the riding level and many of those we supported have their nominations. We have additional staff and volunteers to meet the incredible demands of an election campaign and questionnaires are being returned from candidates; unfortunately, because of the volatility of a minority government, the campaigning begins before an election is officially called. Furthermore, as a member of the Defend Marriage Coalition, we have been additionally active in 2005 fighting against the attempt by Paul Martin and Justice Minister Irwin Cotler to redefine marriage to include homosexual couples.

It’s been mentioned that the Adscam scandal and possible early election are timely opportunities to replace a large number of pro-abortion, anti-marriage Liberal MPs, with pro-life, pro-family candidates from other parties – or in the case of numerous retirements, even with pro-life, pro-family Liberals. Because of this incredible opportunity and despite the fact that it appears an election will be postponed until early 2006, we must be prepared for the possibility of a snap election call at any time.

Like most of you, many employees and volunteers in CLC’s offices have their favourite political parties. Still, CLC’s policy of supporting pro-life candidates regardless of political affiliation is both morally right and politically practical. It is morally right because anyone who genuinely stands up for life deserves the support of pro-lifers, especially those MPs who have a demonstrated track record of defending the sanctity of human life from the moment of conception (fertilization) to natural death. The men and women who stand for elected office while proudly proclaiming their pro-life positions (in everything from a public debate, to what they include in their campaign literature, to signing and returning a CLC questionnaire) are owed the support of pro-life voters regardless of the party banner they are running under.

CLC supports the election of these candidates. Their party doesn’t matter to us; their principles and positions do. In several ridings in recent elections, some voters have been fortunate enough to have more than one pro-life candidate. When this occurs, applaud local pro-lifers who obviously have worked hard and made a difference, and vote for the pro-life candidate of your choice, perhaps even based on other important issues such as healthcare, crime or economics.

Considering the primacy of the abortion issue – it is literally a matter of life and death – we have an obligation to give it much greater weight, and consider a pro-abortion position to be a disqualifying factor.

Through the Parliamentary Pro-Life Caucus, there is a great deal of behind-the-scenes co-operation; our pro-life elected officials know how important this issue is and that it transcends partisanship. In both the battles over same-sex “marriage” and embryonic stem cell research and cloning, a great number of Liberals have joined the opposition in opposing their own government’s radical plans. In both cases, they have, at the very least, slowed down the process. Indeed, they have also sown the seeds for the next generation of pro-life parliamentarians in the battles over life and family in the future.

Winning legislative battles is a simple numbers game; if the pro-death, anti-marriage side has more votes, they win; if we have more votes, we win. Every pro-life, pro-family MP sent to Ottawa is a vote for life-saving, family-defending legislation and each such MP brings us closer to the goal of a pro-life majority. To be sure, there is still a long way to go and lots of work ahead of us, but together, by supporting only pro-life candidates, when that is a possibility, we will elect a pro-life Parliament.

If an election is called, you can obtain information about the candidates in your riding by calling our offices at (416) 204-9749 or 1-800-730-5358 or by checking out the elections page on www.lifesite.net anytime after an election is called.

John Pacheco, the principal organizer of the huge rally in defence of marriage in Ottawa on April 9, was rejected as a possible Conservative candidate for the Ottawa West riding. Despite the fact that Pacheco worked with life, faith and family groups to organize the largest demonstration in memory on Parliament Hill, drawing 15,000 Canadians from all denominations and which had Tory leader Stephen Harper as a speaker, the Conservative Party constituency association deemed him unfit to be their standard-bearer in the riding. Pacheco appealed the decision but the rejection was allowed to stand and Conservative MPP John Baird secured the nomination, making the jump from provincial to federal politics.

Baird, a close ally of Harper who co-chaired his 2003 leadership campaign and served as Ontario co-chair in last year’s federal election, is a proponent of gay “marriage.” Also of serious concern is the distinct possibility that, if he is elected, Baird, like Belinda Stronach, will likely become a thorn in the flesh of the many social conservatives in the party, given his hostility to the social conservatives in his provincial party. We could see the Stronach problems coming from the very beginning. It amazes us that the Harper machine keeps recruiting and favouring these prominent pro-gay, pro-abortion types who are bound to cause grief to the party. We are extremely disappointed in both the riding association and the upper echelons of the party. It appears the party wanted a ‘gay marriage candidate’ rather than a pro-marriage candidate.

On April 27, the U.S. National Academies of Science issued a 240-page report offering what it is calling ethics “guidelines” for scientists doing research using live human embryos and cloning. The NAS report has been enthusiastically greeted by those eager to go forward with embryonic research and cloning. However, the report fails to acknowledge the objections of many in the research community that cloning and experimental research on embryos is itself immoral.

The report makes all the now-standard claims that embryonic stem cell research and cloning are “ethical,” as long as donors give full consent and the clone is intended to be killed and not implanted and brought to term. Furthermore, in-vitro fertilization and other immoral practices are accepted as a matter of course. Critics of embryonic stem cell research note that the proposed 14-day cut-off is completely arbitrary and perhaps even unenforceable.

The NAS’s move in issuing these recommendations is reminiscent of a similar move in 2003, by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. At that time, while legislation had yet to be tabled regarding embryonic research, the CIHR brought out “guidelines” that would allow the use of embryonic human beings in non-voluntary experimental research, in violation of the Nuremberg Code. CIHR head, Alan Bernstein said it was time for the research “to move forward.”

CLC National Organizer Mary Ellen Douglas stated, “The problem with these so called ‘ethics’ guidelines is that no one is watching the watchers. Obviously, it has already been decided that ‘standard’ research ethics should be utilitarian in nature. How was this decided? Who decides which ethics to use?”

However, in late May, Korean scientists announced that they had cloned human embryos and would use them for research purposes. The news of this event led Canadian scientists who favour ESCR to call for Canada’s one-year-old regulations, which were already lax to begin with, to be relaxed even further. Some, such as CIHR’s Bernstein, a stem cell researcher himself, said that science had made Canada’s regulations irrelevant, and called upon Ottawa to allow human cloning so that researchers would have enough human embryos to sate their appetite for destructive research on human beings.

We warned, during the debates over the government’s bill, that the meagre restrictions put in place would not last long as scientists would call for more leeway as “the science progressed.” We hate to say we told them so, but we did tell them so.

The May 16 provincial election saw the Liberals drop from 76 of 79 seats to a bare majority, with the NDP picking up the remainder of the seats. But CLC BC President John Hof explains that since many hardcore pro-abortion Liberal MLAs were defeated the percentage of social conservative members of the Liberal caucus increased significantly. As a result of this shift, grassroots social conservatives will have more influence within the governing party and Hof reports that issues affecting family life will be raised for discussion in the next few years. Hof also noted that the website www.bcelection.org, hosted by CLC BC, BC Teachers and Parents for Life and Real Women of BC and which listed the candidates’ questionnaires, was visited by more than 100,000 people. Hof said that although abortion was not publicly raised as an issue, it was clearly on the minds of voters.

The University of Western Ontario certainly did not expect the level of protest that it has experienced since announcing earlier this Spring that Henry Morgentaler was going to receive an honourary doctorate. More than 10,000 people have signed an online petition against the decision at the website www.uwoprotest.com, alumni have rescinded donations and the president and the board of governors have been picketed by hundreds of local pro-lifers outraged at the honouring of a man who has killed tens of thousands of unborn Canadian babies.

The Interim reports in June that UWO’s “intransigence in awarding an honourary doctor of law degree to notorious abortionist Henry Morgentaler may wind up costing it as much as an astounding $50 million in lost donations from alumni.”

On June 16, the university will bestow an Honourary Doctorate of Laws Degree on Morgentaler and we expect hundreds more pro-lifers to make their views known outside the graduation ceremonies. In an official statement, UWO described Canada’s best-known abortionist as “a humanist leader who has promoted the idea that persons have a right to control their own sexuality and reproduction,without interference from the state.” Columnist Herman Goodden wrote in the London Free Press that it is odd that the university would seem to take sides in such a divisive issue as abortion and that it risked alienating donors and future students.

Don Thain, professor emeritus at UWO’s Ivey Business School, described the situation as “the worst public relations nightmare in the entire history of Western” and blamed UWO President Paul Davenport: “This was his idea, his proposal, and he stickhandled it through the senate, knowing that the senate had an undemocratic procedure.” That is why on May 15, CLC National President Jim Hughes joined about 250 pro-lifers in picketing the university president’s official residence.

Davenport claims that he is powerless to over-ride the decision of the committee that dispenses honourary degrees. Meanwhile the chair of UWO’s board of governors, Don McDougall, said in an open letter to the university community that the honourary degree will “depreciate the honour, adversely affect fundraising (and) do irreparable harm to the university.” Yes, giving a high honour to the largest mass killer of unborn children in Canadian history who promotes abortion as the “right of women to control their own sexuality and reproduction” will do that.

Yours for life
Jim Hughes
National President

Please support CLC's actions with your generous donations.