ABORTION- Where Do We Draw the Line?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rosalinda
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Rosalinda

Guest
Margaret Somerville, ethicist, Globe and Mail, Toronto, June 21

"The conferral of an honorary degree on Dr. Henry Morgentaler provided a
flashpoint for yet another explosion in the long-standing, deeply acrimonious war as to the values that should govern abortion. The two polar positions are well defined, but I want to speak for those, like me, who regard all abortion as raising serious ethical issues, but who would not legally prohibit early abortion.

To allow abortion with sadness and regret is one matter; to celebrate it
and see abortion on demand throughout pregnancy as the litmus test of
respect for women and their rights, is another. The conferral of this degree on Dr. Morgentaler is being taken as an affirmation of the latter position. Those who oppose any restrictions on abortion and believe that society must fully fund and support all abortions are celebrating Dr. Morgentaler’s being honoured; those not of that view deplore it.

Ironically, however, even Dr. Morgentaler, himself, may not implement in practice the pro-choice, totally unfettered right-to-abortion rhetoric.
Recently, I debated him on Discovery TV. I asked him whether he would perform an abortion on a woman who was 28 weeks pregnant, did not need
the abortion for health reasons, but had just changed her mind about having a child. To my surprise, his answer was “no.” So, we agree that a line should be drawn, we just disagree about where to draw it.

In Canada, abortion can be legally performed until just before giving birth, a situation that many pro-choice advocates have vociferously defended. That situation resulted from the Morgentaler case in 1988, but came about more indirectly than directly.

In that case, the Supreme Court of Canada struck down as unconstitutional the Criminal Code’s requirement that, in order to obtain an abortion, a woman must have a therapeutic abortion committee’s certification that abortion was needed to protect her life or health. A plurality of five judges in the majority, with two in dissent, ruled that requirement infringed a woman’s Charter right to security of the
person because she might need an abortion to protect her life or health,
that is, be in “urgent need of medical care,” and not have access to a
therapeutic abortion committee, without which, legal approval could not be forthcoming and abortion would be a crime and unavailable. The court made clear that Parliament could pass legislation to govern abortion, provided it complied with the Supreme Court’s ruling. Parliament unsuccessfully attempted to do so, leaving Canada in the unique position, among comparable countries, of having no legislation governing abortion.

So that leads to the following question: Leaving aside the moral, ethical and legal arguments for and against abortion itself, and assuming that abortion will be available, on what terms and conditions
must abortion be made available? Must it always be made available on demand, or only when medically necessary? And if made available when not medically necessary, must it be covered under our medicare system? Andre Picard, The Globe’s health columnist, is the latest to argue that all women wanting an abortion are in urgent need of medical care (which, according to the Chaouilli case, must be provided). …
 
Margaret Somerville continues “Abortion, Where do We Draw the Line?” , Globe and Mail, commentary

"But what constitutes such a need in the context of abortion? Is “medical care” simply a procedure carried out by a medical practitioner (which is true of all abortions), or is it a procedure required to protect a person’s health (which is untrue of most abortions in the usual sense of the word health when used in relation to medical procedures)? What constitutes medically necessary treatment within the Canada Health Act so that abortion must be funded under that act? Normally, “medically necessary treatment” under the act is a procedure required by a person’s state of health, but not even all such procedures are covered. So cosmetic surgery as a lifestyle choice is not covered, and certain infertility treatments, even though regarded as medically necessary (the courts have recognized infertility as a health problem), are not covered. Is abortion on demand a lifestyle choice like cosmetic surgery?

Or is it medically necessary treatment (just because some institutions choose to characterize it as the latter, does not mean that position must be universally adopted)? In upholding the constitutional validity of the Nova Scotia government’s refusal to fund certain medically necessary infertility treatments, the Court of Appeal held that the province had a right to exercise its discretion as to how limited health-care resources should be allocated taking into account who were the people in most urgent need. So provinces that place some limits on access to abortion on demand (as compared with that needed to protect a woman’s life or health) are not flouting the law, as Mr. Picard, for one, claims.

Did the Supreme Court rule that the Charter guarantees access to abortion? No, it ruled that only reasonable limits on access, consistent with the Charter’s guarantee of the rights to life and security of the person, were allowed. So, for example, access to late-term abortion on demand could be refused through the setting of gestation limits.

Has the Supreme Court decriminalized abortion? Not from a technical legal point of view. It held simply that the abortion provision, as it stood, was unconstitutional, but clearly stated that Parliament could craft a criminal provision that would be constitutional. In short, limits can be placed on access to abortion, including through the use of criminal law, without contravening the Charter."

Ethicist Margaret Somerville holds professorships in both law and medicine at McGill University.
 
Interesting. In my view, I think it wise to step back from the binary view of the law which says abortion must be absolutely unlawful or absolutely lawful. There are more finely grained chips which can be taken against the ‘norm’ of abortion in the next five years.
  1. Duty to inform: Useful would be a statute requiring abortion providers to fully inform applicants. Therefore a pro-life counsellor and a pro-abortion counsellor must be provided at the time of application. An ultra sound must be shown to the applicant. Information as to housing, employment, child care, and so on must be provided as well information as to long-term health effects of abortion such as: depression, suicide, breast cancer, infertility, miscarriage, new-born defects and so on.
  2. Follow up counselling regardless of the applicant’s decision must be mandatory with a view to re-engagement with life.
  3. The Church should create a Parish Life program which sees every parish involving itself in life-affirmation activities which include activism, support and information, prayer, adoption, and post-abortion outreach.
The chip has appeared in the American pro-abortion armour. The Clintons have been saying that abortion should be, among other things rare. This is most likely using ‘rarity’ as currency for accepting ‘safe’ and ‘free.’ We need to be persuaded of the means for making it rare. This would involve creating a vision statement that clearly identifies abortion as being harmful to pregnant women and to society and that recommends a life-affirming position and methodology instead.
 
Yes, Ani your ideas are good. We do have to start in our parishes. Too many of our fellow-worshippers are a little too comfortable with the pro-choice philosophy. Too few priests are speaking about the issues of abortion from the pulpit and too few parishes have as much as the minimum such as posters on the bulletin boards and crisis call numbers published weekly in the parish bulletins. Most important of all, forgiveness and healing must be preached. Too many people have only heard the one side of the story: meaning condemnation of abortion but the aftermath of renewing and restoring one’s relationship with G_d is neglected. There needs to be a balance when speaking about the issue to recognize the post abortion needs of women so we do not unwittingly alienate wounded souls even further and drive them into despair.

As for the legal end there should be an infants pain awareness act in Canada so women will know their children can feel pain during abortion procedures. It should also be a criminal offense to assault a pregnant woman and to harm or kill the child in utero. To use the unfortunate pro-choice lingo, if a woman has decided to have a baby than if his life is unjustly taken through an act of violence- external to the choice of the mother- than the personhood of that child should be recognized and charges laid. It is, afterall, the logic of the women’s right to choose crowd. It’s a baby if she wants it; whereas, it is only a fetus if she doesn’t. Finally, there should be limitations on abortion and the first place to start is with legislation banning partial birth abortions after viability of the infant.
 
40.png
Rosalinda:
Yes, Ani your ideas are good. We do have to start in our parishes. Too many of our fellow-worshippers are a little too comfortable with the pro-choice philosophy. Too few priests are speaking about the issues of abortion from the pulpit and too few parishes have as much as the minimum such as posters on the bulletin boards and crisis call numbers published weekly in the parish bulletins. Most important of all, forgiveness and healing must be preached. Too many people have only heard the one side of the story: meaning condemnation of abortion but the aftermath of renewing and restoring one’s relationship with G_d is neglected. There needs to be a balance when speaking about the issue to recognize the post abortion needs of women so we do not unwittingly alienate wounded souls even further and drive them into despair.

As for the legal end there should be an infants pain awareness act in Canada so women will know their children can feel pain during abortion procedures. It should also be a criminal offense to assault a pregnant woman and to harm or kill the child in utero. To use the unfortunate pro-choice lingo, if a woman has decided to have a baby than if his life is unjustly taken through an act of violence- external to the choice of the mother- than the personhood of that child should be recognized and charges laid. It is, afterall, the logic of the women’s right to choose crowd. It’s a baby if she wants it; whereas, it is only a fetus if she doesn’t. Finally, there should be limitations on abortion and the first place to start is with legislation banning partial birth abortions after viability of the infant.
Click to expand...
Rosalinda:

The courts have declared even that limitation to be UNCONSTITUTIONAL (unless the law has a provision allowing the slightest risk of the slightest harm to the mother’s health to be justification for allowing that type of Abortion - which renders the ban ineffective - Anything can be called a risk to the mother’s health, esp. if you include PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH or the FEELING OF WELL-BEING), which is why we need to be rid of ROE V. WADE and the decisions based on it.

And, In Congress, the Democrats won’t accept even those limits because of the various PRO-ABORTION Groups who do their fundraising and supply them with volunteers.

Add to that the fact the Democrats will continue to Filibuster obviously PRO-LIFE judges nominated to replace strongly PRO-DEATH ones, and we have an increaseingly untenable situation.

I’m afraid that, thanks to the unwelcome antics of some of my fellow Republicans, we will end up having to resort to * Satyagraha* (See the lives and writing of Mohatma Ghandi and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr for what that means) both for the sakes of the unborn who are being slaughtered and of the women who are being scared for life.

Meanwhile, we must get our priests to talk about Abortion (and I’ll include mine) and to include the fact that, as Fr. Corapi says, “God’s name is MERCY, and MERCY is more powerful than SHAME.” The message of the Church has to be clear and unequivocal

I don’t think we can afford anything else.

Blessed are they who act to save God’s Little Ones. Michael
 
40.png
Rosalinda:
As for the legal end there should be an infants pain awareness act in Canada so women will know their children can feel pain during abortion procedures.
Click to expand...
This is good.
40.png
Rosalinda:
It should also be a criminal offense to assault a pregnant woman and to harm or kill the child in utero.
Click to expand...
This is good also.
40.png
Rosalinda:
Finally, there should be limitations on abortion and the first place to start is with legislation banning partial birth abortions after viability of the infant.
Click to expand...
This is good also.

It is by chipping away at the Morgentaler Ruling that we will succeed. Just as they are doing in the U.S. against Roe v Wade. This is a guerilla war, not a conventional war. Fr Pavone is right. The battles will be won in the press; the campaigns won in the courts, and the war won as the Culture of Death lays down its weapons and surrenders before the blinding example of lives lived justly and mercifully in the light of Jesus Christ.
 
Thank you for the new word Traditional Ang.

**satyagraha **-Function: noun
Etymology: New Skt *satyAgraha, *from Sanskrit *satya *truth + *Agraha *persistence
: pressure for social and political reform through friendly passive resistance practiced by M. K. Gandhi and his followers in India.

You will have noted of course Dr. M. in his interview to the London Free Press last week didn’t think civil disobedience was necessary anymore because Canada is already a democracy. Still, ironically, he has established himself as a role model for just that.

Fr. Benedict Groeschel has spoken many times on the Eternal Word Television Network of the time he was arrested for praying the rosary on his knees and supposedly blocking entrance to an abortuary. The police officers who arrested and stripped searched him, along with 2 other clergymen, identified themselves as Catholics “just doing their job”. There are numerous examples of Christians persecuted for giving public witness to the truth - in a peaceful manner.

Unfortunately, Canadian Supreme Court justices have put believers on notice that when there is a collision of human rights interests with religious rights the former will trump the latter.
 
Here is the question put forth to Dr. M. by Free Press reporter and his response.

"Q To oppose an unjust law, you chose to break the law and yet today you said you don’t advocate civil disobedience. You advised students to change laws through the political process. Has your opinion changed?

I think that to practise civil disobedience, first of all it’s very difficult for the fact that you’ll be jailed and persecuted. I don’t think in a democratic society like Canada, it should not be necessary, really."
 
Other creative measures:

An “informed consent” law which requires that women be provided with information about the relationship between abortion and sterility, and abortion and cancer.

A law requiring that women be offered an ultrasound prior to an abortion.

A law requiring that grief counseling be made available to all men (fathers) and women involved in an abortion.
Peace.
John

Note that none of these could be termed “anti-choice.” They all make for a more informed and safe choice.
Anyone opposing these measure could legitimately be accused of deviating from a “pro-choice” position to a truly “pro-abortion” position.
 
john ennis:
Note that none of these could be termed “anti-choice.” They all make for a more informed and safe choice.
Anyone opposing these measure could legitimately be accused of deviating from a “pro-choice” position to a truly “pro-abortion” position.
Click to expand...
Yes. Exactly. Hey thinking up our new society is fun. Anybody else got any ideas?
 
"You are never too young or too old to oppose evil."

The silent majority who privately oppose abortion but are not willing to take concrete, public action to voice their objections have to be mobilized. During the Morgentaler debacle it was disheartening how many fellow Catholics leading otherwise exemplary, holy lives were not informed as they have tuned out the outside world; they no longer bother to read the newspapers, watch the news or use the Internet. They are content to go about with their daily lives undisturbed, unperturbed while this warfare for the lives of our nation’s children is left to too few. This battle against the forces of evil is not one anyone can justify to opt out of. That is the nature of war; ordinary lives and routines are upset. It doesn’t matter how old and tired one is or how young and busy. If you are alive you have something to contribute to the culture of life. When God calls you home than your work is done and not before. If you are too busy to fight for justice than you are too busy; it is time to reorganize your priorities and find the time. Nor is it acceptable to claim one does not have sufficient education to write letters or that one has a professional profile in the community which would be jeopardized by giving public witness.

The only reason the culture of death has advanced as far as it has in the first place is because people of faith fell asleep on watch and others more energetic and willing to sacrifice for their nihilistic goals achieved their evil objectives as a result. The proverbial all evil needs to triumph is that good men remain silent.

Dr. M.'s recent assumption to the podium of akademeia is a wake up call to action. Each one of us will be held to account for the innocent blood shed on our land. Future generations will ask questions. What will we answer: I was too busy, too young, too ignorant, too tired, too old?

Yesterday they came for the youngest and the weakliest; today they come for the oldest and the weakliest; tomorrow they will come for the strong and the silent.
 
Rosalinda:

Every year RC churches have a life-chain protest against abortion which anyone can join. The one I attend is at the corner of Islington and Bloor Sts, Toronto. The numbers have remained constant over the years.

Now, apart from this there is another effective way to defeat abortion and that is prayer and penance. A true and tried way of defeating evil, recommended by Our Lady at Fatima and other shrines.

I wouldn’t criticize the ordinary Catholic too much as our bishops are at fault for not doing their job over the years. Remember the primacy of conscience debate which overode the contents of *Humanae Vitae * , and the recent advice to priests in Toronto not to speak about same-sex marriage in case the church has its charitable status removed. These are related incidents to the abortion debate.
 
The person who in 2004 warned the priests in Toronto not to speak out against SSM because the church might lose her charitable status was Toronto Auxiliary Bishop Richard Grecco.
 
Pondero, Prayer and penance first and foremost, yes I agree. This is spiritual warfare and we always need to put on ‘the armor of Christ before going into battle’ Otherwise, our time and efforts are wasted if we the church militant on earth neglect to solicit the church triumphal in heaven.

Fr. Pacwa of Priests for Life has prayer booklets for the unborn. Maybe these should be purchased and distributed in parishes as well as stocking the book racks in chapels of perpetual adoration. Finally, every Mass, meaning both weekdays and Sundays, should have a prayer to end abortion. All that said we still need to give public witness. There are too many closet Catholics keeping their light hidden while the world is in critical need of light. Afterall, as Fr. John Corapi says, the greater the darkness the farther your light will shine.

Fr. Pacwa has a simple suggestion which is to recommend to everyone to visit his website priestsforlife.org to see the images of what abortion really looks like. Looking at the reality of abortion can be more powerful and galvanizing than words and abstract concepts.

As for Aux. Bishop Grecco, he is mistaken if he believes his silence will afford him any protection. Silence is yielding to intimidation tactics and allowing the opposition to run with the ball unimpeded rather than falling over the ‘stumbling block’ of Christ. The gay activists have already declared their intention to yank charitable tax status from churches which do not conform to their philosophy of secular humanism. For obvious reasons, the Catholic Church is their primary target. Moreover, it is a work of mercy to instruct the ignorant. The clergy are called to preach ‘in season and out of season’ whether moral teaching is in favor or out of favor; otherwise, the faithful will be ‘tossed about with doubts and difficulties with every wind of change’.
 
Dr. Morgentaler is a well known secular humanist and this quotation found under musings in the navigation bar of www.morgentaler.com confirms a primary objective of the so-called ‘free choice’ crowd to silence their opposition.

"We have freedom of religion and conscience enshrined in the Constitution but much remains to be done for a complete separation Church and State and the creation of a truly secular society, where the practice of religion becomes and stays a private matter for the individual."
 
Today, there is yet another letter to the editor in the London Free Press telling prolifers to mind their own business.

Efforts better directed to children in need now by Janet Charendoff.

"Right-to-lifers should concentrate their efforts where it will do some good for those who need it now.

There are millions of children in the world, suffering and dying now of starvation and untreated illnesses. Put your energy toward helping them, instead of worrying about a few unwanted cells in a woman’s uterus.

Practice tolerance and keep your opinions to yourself. If you must become activists, help those in need. Raise money and awareness for those already living. Contribute to Doctor’s Without Borders, CARE Canada, Unicef, Red Cross, any worthy charities. Stop sticking your noses in other people’s private business, where it doesn’t belong. Your energies could be much better spent."
 
Rosalinda said:
Efforts better directed to children in need now by Janet Charendoff.
Click to expand...

This is just anti-Catholic hatred. And we should no longer flinch from calling it such. The Catholic Church contributes much money, personnel, resources, and energy to protecting and helping high-needs populations on our planet. I simply have become hard line. When people pull out their anti-Catholic point-lists (including this one), I challenge them to criticize five Catholic charities and then I challenge them to name five ‘ist’ charities. It could be feminist, gay-ist, secularist, whatever.

At this point the person usually gets aggressive and changes the subject, trying to bark at the Church for some other invented reason. Then I call them on it, tell them they are inventing justifications for what amounts to their own ignorance and religious bigotry. Then I tell them that they are indulging their own ignorance and religious bigotry in a time that requires cooperation between faiths, including those with no faith and their position is essentially a selfish position.

Not very nice for them, but it sure makes it clear for those vulnerable people who are searching for answers and end up being (otherwise) seduced by these bigots.

Pope Benedict calls for clarity and charity. Enough mealy-mouthing. One of the 7 works of charity is correction.
 
Great letter appeared in the Ottawa Citizen yesterday by Barbara McAdorey who is the administrator for Canadian Physicians for Life. She is not prepared to forget June 16, 2005, a day that angels surely wept as souls entrusted to their care paid homage to one who most surely is an Anti-Christ figure: Henry Morgentaler, an avowed secular humanist and abortionist.

Whereas Jesus came that we all may live life abundantly this Canadian has taken life abundantly. Whereas doctors were once jailed for the destruction of nascent human life we now promenade them across stages as role models. Her letter to the editor follows:

"Re: Morgentaler accepts degree amid familiar controversy, June 17.

On June 16, at the University of Western Ontario, Henry Morgentaler was awarded a doctor of laws degree.

In his speech, he told the audience how he was instrumental in bringing about a “safer, kinder society.” I am led to believe that I, as a Canadian woman, owe my “emancipation” to this man, that it is because of him I am able to “fully participate in society and assume (my) full potential,” that I am now “fully equal” because he has given me the “freedom” to kill my very own children before they are born, and that I need this “freedom” to “be able to give life to wanted babies.” He received a lengthy, standing ovation.

In his chilling novel Nineteen Eighty-four, George Orwell described Big Brother’s totalitarian regime, which sought to control the people by controlling their thoughts. Those able to resist the mind-control techniques employed by the Ministry of Truth, such as the invention of “truth” and the abuse of the English language, were sent to the Ministry of Love where they were terrorized by what they most feared until their will was broken – until they believed two plus two equalled five – until they learned to love Big Brother.

The audience at the UWO ceremony loved Henry Morgentaler. How long will it be before the Ministry of Love comes for me?"

Barbara McAdorey,
Richmond ON

For your reference, I have copied the link to Henry Morgentaler’s speech below:

communications.uwo.ca/western_news/story.html?listing_id=18832&PHPSESSID=42c7c31a60ca477499fff2d8e1517537
 
Unfortunatley, the London Free Press continues printing letters attacking Herman Goodden whose articles can be found in the “Courageous Mothers Thanked” thread. Note the call already for an Order of Canada.

Dave Telford of London, today writes,** A thin pretext.**
“Regarding the column, History of ‘justice’ unsettling to read(june 17):
Herman Goodden’s topic of historical trials appears to have been a pretext for slagging Dr. H. M.
An Order of Canada would be appropriate for this hero to thousands of Canadian women. UWO and the area should mark June 16, 2005 as a proud day in the progress of human rights.”
 
The university of Western Ontario was the stepping stone to the Order of Canada for Morgentaler. Dr Killan of (Catholic) Kings College made the trade-off between Morgentaler getting the degree and Rev Malloy (of Notre Dame) getting the degree.

Dr Killan! I say if you could give Dr Morgentaler and Rev Malloy the honorary doctorates then you can give Dr Morgentaler and Rev Malloy the Order of Canada! Fair is fair.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top