From the moment we broke the news days before the Governor General formally announced on July 1 that Henry Morgentaler would receive the Order of Canada, there has been a renewal of pro-life activism in the country. About 1,000 people went to Rideau Hall, the GG’s residence, to protest the outrageous awarding of the OC to Morgentaler.

More than 70 MPs spoke out against the award. (That’s nearly one-quarter of the House of Commons standing up on principle!) At least eight individuals have returned their Order of Canada or that of a deceased family member or institutional leader; many others are considering doing so or have not made their actions public. The on-line petition we launched in early July garnered almost 18,000 signatures plus well over 10,000 signatures have come in on the paper form of the petition. We have received word that MPs, the Prime Minister and the Governor General have been inundated with letters, faxes and e-mails criticizing the decision to give Morgentaler the country’s highest civilian honor.

We have received donations from people whose active pro-life involvement ended long ago, but who were upset at this brazen act of official favouritism toward one side of the abortion debate. The attempt by Canada’s cultural and political elite that forms the Advisory Council for the Order of Canada, to put an official stamp of approval on abortion-on-demand and signal that the debate on this issue is over, has clearly back-fired. Rather, they have ignited a renewed discussion on abortion in the media and among the general public.

It is our responsibility to ensure this debate hears a clear pro-life voice that all human life, from the moment of conception (fertilization) to natural death, is sacred and deserves legal protection. Please continue to write to your MPs, register your dissatisfaction about the Order of Canada with the Governor General’s office, send letters to the editor, participate in radio call-in shows, and raise the abortion issue in other ways.

CLC commissioned the Winnipeg-based polling firm KlrVu Research to poll Canadians in an unbiased random telephone survey on whether or not they agreed with Morgentaler receiving the Order of Canada. KlrVu called more than 150,000 households – nearly ten times more than typical polls – which resulted in more than 13,000 responses. A clear majority, 56%, opposed Morgentaler receiving the Order of Canada. The poll has a 95% confidence level and has a margin of error of 1.5%.

Respondents were asked, “Do you believe abortionist Henry Morgentaler deserves the Order of Canada, Press 1 for Yes, Press 2 for No.” The majority in every Province except Quebec opposed Morgentaler’s award, but even in Quebec 47% opposed him receiving the Order of Canada. The highest opposition was in Altantic Canada (62% or more in each of the four Provinces) and the Prairies (64-66%), but even in Ontario (58%) and BC (55%), the majority clearly opposed Morgentaler’s Order of Canada.

Many online and radio call-in polls confirm the KlrVu results, including polls from Newstalk 650 in Saskatoon, the Calgary Herald, the Winnipeg Sun, VOCM in St. John’s, the Globe and Mail, Newfoundland, and CTV.ca, all of which found that a majority of respondents opposed.

CLC National President Jim Hughes said, “Whatever side of the abortion debate you are on, many Canadians from all walks of life felt this appointment went way too far.”

The poll was released July 22, as newspapers were still running columns about the Order of Canada, yet there was a media blackout of the poll. While just 10 days earlier, many papers provided coverage of a much smaller Ipsos-Reid poll purporting to show that two-thirds of Canadians support Morgentaler’s award, there was no coverage of the CLC poll. Every major news outlet in the country received notice of the poll results through Canada News Wire. A notobale exception was Michael Coren reporting the poll results on his show on CTS.

Pro-abortion bloggers (web-based writers) attempted to discredit the pollster, suggesting that because the owner was the brother of a Conservative politician opposed to abortion, that somehow the pollster would fudge the results. However, taking such an accusation seriously would discredit every pollster in the country, since most are politically aligned. Specifically it would touch one of the nation’s largest pollsters, Leger Marketing. Jean Marc Léger, who is the President of Leger Marketing, is the brother of Nicole Léger, a Member of the Provincial Parliament for Pointe-aux-Trembles in the east end of Montreal. Their father, Marcel, was Minister of the Environment and tourism under Rene Lévesque.

Another complaint was that the wording of our poll question was biased and skewed the results. Again, our question was, “Do you believe abortionist Henry Morgentaler deserves the Order of Canada?” That is about as straight up as you can get. Morgentaler’s main claim to fame, by far, is that he committed over 100,000 abortions and had to repeatedly break the law and finally get the law changed to do so. The Ipsos Reid poll question was, “As you may know, it has been announced that abortion-rights activist and Doctor Henry Morgentaler will receive the Order of Canada, the country’s highest honour. Do you support or oppose Dr. Morgentaler receiving the Order of Canada?” Nothing there about him being Canada’s leading abortionist. Yes, he was a doctor, but all he did was abortions. Specialists are usually referred to by their field of expertise. The Ipsos poll very conveniently omitted that important fact.

The CLC poll was conducted using normal polling methods and KlrVu obtained a random phone list of more than 150,000 households from Info Canada. The list is weighted according to the population distribution in the nation as published by Statistics Canada. This is standard among reputable pollsters. It is difficult not to see media bias in this ignoring of poll results that show most Canadians disagreeing with the decision to give the country’s most famous abortionist its highest civilian honour.

On July 29, Linda Gibbons was freed from jail after serving nearly 2 ½ months for obstructing a peace officer, and one day after her trial at College Park Court. On May 15, the veteran pro-life activist was arrested outside the Scott abortuary in Toronto for violating the terms of the 1994 “temporary,” but still enforced, injunction prohibiting pro-life activity within 20 meters of Ontario abortion facilities. She was charged with obstructing a peace officer rather than violating a court order (the injunction), a seemingly politically motivated maneuver designed to prevent a challenge to the constitutionality of the injunction which severely restricts the free speech rights of pro-lifers.

For more than a decade, CLC has been protesting that police and the Crown Attorneys have been inappropriately laying the charge of obstructing a peace officer on Linda and others who have been arrested for peacefully violating the court injunction. CLC has been calling it a “serious abuse of legal process.” Can anyone now deny that this has become a major case of law enforcement corruption (with the complicity of the Ontario Attorney General) that demands a public enquiry? In 1998, the late Rev. Ken Campbell had his charge of obstructing a peace officer thrown out by Justice Milton Cadsby, who termed it baseless. Justice Cadsby also questioned the legitimacy of the injunction, noting that, as a “temporary” measure, it was time it was re-examined.

Upon the reading of the charge against Linda Gibbons, Justice J. Sutherland questioned the prosecution on how it was possible to obstruct a peace officer by disobeying a court order. The case proceeded with Justice Sutherland entering a not guilty plea on her behalf after she remained silent, as has been her consistent practice in solidarity with the voiceless unborn.

After observing that the wording in the information on the charge was “unusual” and “odd,” he found her guilty. The prosecutor asked the judge to levy a stiff sentence of six months in prison in addition to time already served, making for a total imprisonment of eight and a half months, saying “denunciation” and “general deterrence” were the motivating factors in requesting such a heavy penalty. The Judge gave her a two-for-one credit on time already served, translating to five months and noting that it is difficult to come up with an appropriate sentence in light of the fact that she would go out of her way to violate the injunction regardless. He sentenced her to five months imprisonment (including time already served). She would have to serve one more day after sentencing and there was no probation added. Supporters, including those from Campaign Life Coalition and Show the Truth, were present – and surprised.

She was re-arrested two days later, when she once again witnessed outside the Scott abortuary. The abuse of the legal system and the 14-year ‘temporary’ injunction must end.

If you want proof that when Christians speak out in defense of their values and principles, politicians will listen, look no further than the Provincial Legislature of Ontario. Earlier this year, Liberal Premier Dalton McGuinty said he wanted to scrap the Lord’s Prayer from daily proceedings of Queen’s Park, saying that it did not adequately represent the multicultural Ontario of 2008.

By a vote of 58-0, the Legislature maintained the Lord’s Prayer and decided to add a rotation of other prayers from eight different religious traditions as well as a moment of silence. Many MPPs spoke out on how there was little clamour about the prayer before McGuinty made it an issue and most MPPs said they heard loudly and clearly – and often – from constituents upset with the Premier’s proposal. Thousands of messages inundated MPPs’ offices and 30,000 Ontarians signed petitions which were presented to an all-party committee examining McGuinty’s idea of scrapping the Lord’s Prayer.

Notably, McGuinty, a Catholic, was absent from the vote – he did not even show up to support his own proposal. He claimed he “was just caught up in other things.” But perhaps he did not want to disappoint his mother, who the Toronto Sun reported, was miffed with her son’s idea.

Bloc MP Francine Lalonde has resurrected her 2005 bill (C-407) that, if passed, would legalize euthanasia and doctor-assisted suicide. C-407 died on the table when an election was called in December 2005. On June 12, she unveiled C-562, a slightly revised version of her earlier attempt to legalize euthanasia. The official summary of C-562 says, “This enactment amends the Criminal Code to allow a medical practitioner, subject to certain conditions, to aid a person who is experiencing severe physical or mental pain without any prospect of relief or is suffering from a terminal illness to die with dignity once the person has expressed his or her free and informed consent to die.”

We have long warned that this was coming. The Culture of Death, once embedded in society, seeks to expand its tentacles. A society that has legal abortion will soon be challenged by euthanasia and other ways of killing people that run under the banner of ‘rights’.

Like the early so-called safeguards on abortion (Therapeutic Abortion Committees that served as rubber stamp approval committees), the safeguards for euthanasia will not protect a soul. C-562 would require that anyone seeking euthanasia be at least 18 years of age, have a terminal illness, have tried or expressly refused the appropriate treatments available and have continued to experience severe physical or mental pain without any prospect of relief. But it also says that a patient must appear lucid. But what does ‘appear lucid’ mean? A patient must sign a consent to euthanasia twice within a given time period, but there is no guarantee that the signature would not be coerced. C-562 would not require patients to attempt life-saving treatments, only that they expressly refuse it. We are concerned that patients will not fully understand the gravity of their decision.

Alex Schadenberg, the executive director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, said of Bill C-562, “The bill is a direct threat to the lives of people with disabilities and/or chronic conditions.” Schadenberg criticized the bill saying “it establishes euthanasia and assisted suicide as treatment options for problems that are properly solved by effective and compassionate medical care.”

It is impossible to know when people who are dying, experiencing pain or suffering emotionally, have made a fully informed, lucid decision to end their life, have given in to pressure from others or have exaggerated how much they are a burden on loved ones (common among seriously ill patients).

Introducing C-562, Lalonde said: “My thoughts go especially to all those who are suffering, who meet the conditions in this bill and who could choose to die with dignity. As long as the Criminal Code is not amended … they will not have this choice.” Our thoughts, too, go to those who are suffering. Our solution, though, is to ensure that they get treatment (while Lalonde’s bill allows patients to refuse treatment) and that their suffering is adequately addressed (too often it is not).

Euthanasia is not a form of mercy but a sign that we have given up on the sick and dying. It is the abandonment of hope and surrender to the cult of death. It may be convenient for some, but how dare we put the convenience of medical staff or relatives above the care that vulnerable people need. Euthanasia and doctor-assisted suicide must be resisted.

Action Item: Contact your MPs and urge them to oppose C-562 when it comes to a vote before Parliament. Let them know that their vote on euthanasia will be a deciding factor for you when the next Federal election is called. Contact info: House of Commons Parliament Buildings, Ottawa, ON, K1A 0A6.

Samuel Golobchuck, the 84-year-old Orthodox Jew from Manitoba who was at the center of a right to care case, passed away peacefully in hospital June 24. He was hospitalized with pneumonia last October and, although he recovered from his illness, his weakened condition prevented him from returning home. Winnipeg’s Grace Hospital attempted to withdraw basic care including food, hydration and a respirator in order to “allow him to die.” His family objected and the case made its way to the Provincial courts.

His family argued that killing him by dehydration and starvation was contrary to his wishes and his religious beliefs; he was not terminally ill nor in any pain whatsoever, but rather needed basic care. The family sought and obtained an emergency court order to stop the hospital’s dehydration of Mr. Golubchuck and Justice Perry Shulman of the Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench granted the order while the case of who could decide ‘treatment’ was determined by the courts.

Dr. Anand Kumar, the critical care specialist attending to Mr. Golubchuck called the life-sustaining care ‘grotesque’, an ‘abomination’ and ‘immoral’. He resigned from the hospital rather than obey the court order. When Mr. Golubchuck passed away, family lawyer Neil Kravetsky said the patient “didn’t die because they pulled him off life support. He died when his time had come.” On their website about the case, the family said the battle to protect their relative was not merely their own: “We’re fighting for the kind of society we want to live in and leave to future generations. If bureaucrats can refuse to care for our father because he’s too old and disabled, then they can refuse to care for anyone they deem unworthy.”

Alex Schadenberg, executive director of Canada’s Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, said pressure must continue to be exerted on the Manitoba College of Physicians and Surgeons, which allows doctors to withdraw treatment, including basic care such as food and water.

The Quebec Government is preparing to present a bill to the National Assembly (the Provincial Legislature) that seeks to end the practice of hospitals treating foetuses under 500 grams as biomedical waste. At the same time, Ontario is reportedly gearing up for a newly instituted “Pregnancy & Infant Loss Awareness Day” which will take place annually on October 15. The October 15 Awareness Day is already recognized nationally in the United States, but will be a new innovation for Canada if the reports are true.

As reported by Cyberpresse.ca, Quebec’s Department of Health and Social Services intends on tabling a bill before the National Assembly as early as September to amend the law concerning hospital funeral practices for foetuses under 500 grams. Currently, most hospitals dispose of such foetuses by incinerating them along with other waste tissues. The Government initiative, however, seeks to propagate a practice that is becoming more popular in several Quebec Hospitals. The Hospital Sainte-Justine in Montreal, pending ratification by its board of directors, has recently revised its policy on the matter, electing to direct all “identifiable foetuses” to the Mont-Royal cemetery, regardless of weight or length of life. Luc Gagnon, president of Campagne Quebec Vie, expressed his support for the practice of giving funerals to foetuses: “Our association is quite favourable to these types of ceremonies.”

The Government-proposed amendment, observing that it would minimize a mother’s pain, grief and guilt, is only exacerbated by the thought of the body of her unborn child being incinerated with a medley of body parts. Suzy Fréchette-Piperni, author of Rêves Envolés (Dreams Flown Away), a book on post natal mourning, said that many mothers, because they are in a state of shock after the loss of their unborn baby, do not think about what the hospital does with the body of their child until it is too late.

If this passes, and if the unconfirmed reports of Ontario instituting the October 15 “Pregnancy & Infant Loss Awareness Day” is indeed true, there is renewed hope that the unborn child will be treated with greater respect in Canada. While these – like Ken Epp’s bill recognizing the Unborn Victim’s of Crime – are not ‘anti-abortion’ measures, – they are important in recognizing the dignity and significance of preborn human life.

Despite a massive political and media misinformation campaign to paint C-484, Ken Epp’s Private Member’s bill recognizing the Unborn Victims of Crime, as an anti-abortion law, polls indicate the public supports this common sense legislation. An Angus Reid Strategies poll conducted June 4-5 shows that a majority of Quebecers (50%) support C-484 compared to just 35% who oppose it. The Quebec media has attempted to portray the Province’s people as being against the bill, but the polling data indicates solid support for it. Furthermore, as other polls have indicated, women are slightly more likely to support legislation protecting unborn victims of crime, with 53% of Quebec women backing the law.

Another Angus Reid Strategies poll (released June 24) showed more than two-thirds of Canadians supporting C-484, including 54% of those in Quebec. Nationally 68% support the bill and 13% are opposed to it. The highest support came in Atlantic Canada (80%) and the lowest in Quebec.

C-484, which would make it a separate crime if an attacker knowingly harms or kills a foetus being carried by a pregnant woman, passed Second Reading in March. Hearings before the Justice Committee have not yet been scheduled and there is the possibility that if an election is called or this Parliament is prorogued, that it would die in committee.

On June 16, two men were convicted of killing Tasha Lynn Rossette in 2005; she was four months pregnant and one of the men, Amjad Khan, was the father of the unborn child. As is too often the case, the women and their children are targeted by husbands, boyfriends, and former lovers who seem to have issues with the fact that the woman is with child. Unfortunately, neither man was charged with the death of the child since no provision in the Criminal Code recognizes the unborn child as a victim of crime.

A former abortion mill worker, Tina Davis, has gone public with a story that is gruesome but all too predictable. Davis, who used to work for late-term abortion specialist George Tiller in Wichita, Kansas, alleges that California abortionist Shelley Sella, who did rotation work at Tiller’s Women’s Health Care Services abortuary, killed a 35-week-gestation baby who survived an abortion by stabbing a utensil into the child’s rib cage and twisting it until the baby stopped moving.

As Troy Newman, President of Operation Rescue (which helped Davis bring the story to the public’s attention), noted, “At 35 weeks, there is no doubt about viability. This is murder in anybody’s book.” Kansas health authorities are investigating Tiller’s medical practices because numerous questionable occurrences have been alleged against the abortionist. This is of special concern, not only because it demonstrates the unfathomable lack of respect for human life abortionists have, but because women from Ontario and Quebec are sometimes sent to Tiller’s Kansas abortuary for late-term abortions because few abortionists in Canada are willing to do late-term abortions.

In 2006, NDP Ontario MPP Peter Kormos (Welland) introduced a Private Members bill that would have installed a system of presumed consent in the Province by which doctors could harvest organs from individuals who suffered ‘brain death’. Kormos has now been joined by his colleague MPP Cheri DiNovo (Parkdale-High Park) in getting presumed consent back on the Legislative agenda, threatening to re-introduce his bill this Fall. Citing a list of 1700 people waiting for organ transplants, Kormos says his approach is urgently needed to provide the organs for those needing transplants.

Under existing law, people who want to become organ donors must state in advance that they wish to donate their organs, but the Kormos bill will require that people who do not want to have their body parts removed after a brain death assessment will be obliged make a deliberate opt out of what is otherwise presumed consent.

As we noted when Kormos introduced his bill in 2006, there was no such thing as “brain death.” CLC Medical Advisor Dr. John Shea notes most human body parts, in order to be useful for transplantation, must be taken from a donor with a pumping heart. That is, the person must be alive when the vital organs are removed. Knowing that relatives would be reluctant to donate the organs that were keeping family members alive, a group of transplant physicians invented the term brain death in 1968. But while the term is often bandied about, there is no set medical definition of brain death; by some counts there are more than a dozen definitions of brain death.

The common feature is that the heart and other organs are still working or are being artificially kept working for the purpose of transplant organ harvesting. The dying but not-yet-dead patient still needs and is still using his or her organs. But once they are removed, the patient is killed (if the heart and lungs are taken). This is morally wrong and to presume patients would want their deaths hastened to provide such a “gift” is indefensible.

There are serious problems with voluntary donation of vital organs for transplant (the heart, lungs, pancreas); having the Government presume that it has first claim to our body parts – unless we give written notice that we object to such an arrangement – is dangerous. We do not oppose measures that encourage live-donor transplants – including kidneys and liver grafts (the most commonly necessary transplants) – but cannot stand for a system that looks at patients as potential sources of organ harvests rather than individuals who deserve the best care in times of their vulnerability. As well, the large growth in the lucrative organ transplant industry in recent years is said, by some, to be gradually undermining needed emphasis on continuing research for cures and new treatments for those requiring replacement organs.

Action Item: Ontario residents should write (not postage free) to their MPPs and urge them to speak and vote against Kormos’ organ donation bill when it is debated at Queen’s Park. Legislative Building, Queen’s Park, Toronto ON M7A 1A1

One of the best means of spreading the pro-life message and keeping people informed about life and family issues is through the pages of The Interim, your pro-life newspaper that has been publishing monthly for 25 years. If you do not have a paid subscription, order one today. It is one of the best things you can do to promote pro-life news and views. A regular paid subscription is $40 per year, but a special rate is offered to CLC supporters, only $25 for a one year subscription. E-mail dirocco@lifesite.net or phone 416-204-1687.

LifeChain is the annual pro-life witness that takes place across North America every Fall, and in Canada, tens of thousands proclaim that abortion is wrong. Pro-lifers from coast to coast stand with the signs that remind the public that abortion takes the lives of unborn children, that it harms women, and that there are alternatives to abortion. Plan to take part on October 5 this year, for one hour from 2–3 pm in most locations.

We remind supporters that Jesus asked His apostles to keep watch for one hour while He prayed in the garden of Gethsemane. Do not be among those who are called yet fall asleep. Those driving by, plus pedestrians who view signs, number in the millions, so this is an extremely important demonstration of pro-life values that can change the hearts and minds of Canadians. For more information, including how you can become a LifeChain organizer in your community or within your church, please contact us at (416) 204-9749 or 1-800-730-5358.

CLC National is co-sponsoring the International Pro-Life Conference “Creating a Culture of Life Around the Globe,” in Toronto October 2-4 with Life Canada and the International Right to Life Federation. The conference is hosted by CLC Toronto. The organizing committee has put together an incredible roster of speakers including Dr. Jack Willke, president of IRLF; Father Gerard Wilberforce, the great, great grandson of slavery abolitionist William Wilberforce,; Georgette Forney, co-founder of Silent No More Awareness Campaign; Stephanie Gray of the Canadian Centre for Bioethical Reform; Brian Rooney, director of communications for the Thomas More Law Society; Bert Dorenbos, president of the Dutch pro-life group Cry for Life; Rosemary Connell of Show the Truth; Dr. Talmir Rodriguez, a Brazilian legislator; Phil Horgan, the president of the Catholic Civil Rights League; Senator Kit and Fenny Tatad, pro-life leaders from the Philippines; John-Henry Westen, editor of LifeSiteNews.com; Dr. Sheila Harding, Associate Dean of Medical Education at the University of Saskatchewan; Fr. Alphonse deValk C.S.B., editor of Catholic Insight magazine; Lech Kowalewski, co-founder of the Polish Federation of Pro-Life Movements; Ewa Kowalewska, executive director of Human Life International; the Sisters of Life; Fr. Raymond de Souza, a columnist with the National Post; MPs Tom Wappel and Jeff Watson, and former MP Pat O’Brien.

The conference price is $195 and that includes the Thursday reception and Friday banquet. The cost for the conference without the reception and banquet is $150. You can register by calling CLC at (416) 204-9749 or 1-800-730-5358. The conference will be held at the Marriott Toronto Airport Hotel and there are a limited number of rooms being reserved at a special price for conference attendees – a saving of more than $100 per room per night – so book as soon possible. Standard rooms will be $109 a night. Suites are $149, not including taxes.

Quote code NLC to avail yourself of the special rates when calling the hotel at (416) 674-9400.

We look forward to seeing you at the conference.

CLC needs a secretary for the National President in our Toronto office. The secretary needs to be a strongly self-motivated, flexible and people-oriented person especially competent in reliably providing a wide variety of secretarial services in a fast-paced environment. The positions requires an extensive knowledge of pro-life issues and a strong, personal commitment to the pro-life cause. Candidates for this positions would ideally be very familiar with Campaign Life Coalition and its work. Please contact office manager Deny Dieleman at (416) 204-9749 or 1-800-730-5358.

Occasionally, it is necessary to activate pro-lifers for immediate action. For those of you with access to the internet, please forward your email address to clc@lifesite.net. This will enable us to enhance our communications with supporters for specific action items.

Yours for life and family
Jim Hughes
CLC National President