Here is the article - I hope this does not break any rules:
There are many reasons why the pro-life movement has had relatively little success in Canada; but one crucial one, I think, is that pro-lifers have allowed liberals to define the issue, and we operate, speak and think within liberal paradigms.
For liberals, the unborn child is a non-entity. When the so-called abortion issue comes up, what springs to mind is the notion of CHOICE and access to a medical operation called ABORTION.
In the liberal paradigm, which dominates our public discourse, when pro-lifers oppose abortion, embryonic stem cell research, cloning, etc. they do so to oppose CHOICE or ABORTION. In the liberal mindset, pro-lifers want to take away a person’s right to an operation. The unborn child does not figure at all in the presentation of the issue. It’s presented as a moral issue about abstract concepts.
Unfortunately, even well-meaning pro-lifers help perpetuate this state of affairs. The language they use does nothing to challenge liberal paradigms, thereby allowing liberals to continue thinking the way they’ve always have, without having to question their beliefs.
Pro-lifers are said to believe human life is sacred and that all people have the right to life. But this does nothing for the cause of unborn children. Why? Because for liberals, life is simply a biological reality, and biological realities do not have rights. Life is a thing, a thing that only has relative value. Amoeba, plants, animals, humans, these are approximately equivalent. When pro-lifers talk about “life”, liberals hear “amoeba” or something equivalent. They do not take the notion seriously, and it is therefore easy for them to dismiss the whole debate. The subtext of the so-called abortion debate, to the liberal mind is this: Pro-life zealots want to take away the right to a medical operation called abortion in the name of life, a biological reality, which they consider more important than people.
The more pro-lifers harp on about the right to life, the more they hit against a brick wall. The “sanctity of life” is absolutely meaningless in a liberal context. Pro-lifers believe that because they cherish that value so dearly, and that human life is obviously more valuable than anything else, if they talk about it enough, they will eventually win the so-called abortion debate. It doesn’t work that way. So long as the issue for pro-lifers is about life liberals can mentally dismiss the issue. Life is not important, therefore not worth debating, therefore the liberal discourse in our country will not be challenged.
Pro-lifers must learn to re-think the issue. What the so-called abortion debate is about is people, because the unborn child is a person. This assertion is the key to advancing the debate.
Personhood is the cornerstone of legal and social recognition in Canada. Of course liberals do not believe that the unborn child is a person. Most people who’re liberal-minded have never been confronted with that assertion. So long as pro-lifers present the debate as a crusade for life, the liberal can tune out, as life is only a biological reality. But once it becomes about the personhood of the unborn child, the concept must be challenged. The liberal has to pay attention because one of his pet notions is being invoked, and he believes it must not be distorted in order to perpetuate his system of thought. He is therefore obliged to answer the challenge about who the unborn child is. He must come face to face with both biological AND moral realities.
By advancing the personhood of the unborn child, the subtext of the abortion debate is not: should you have the right to an abortion?; but: is the unborn child a person?
This is ultimately the real issue about the abortion debate. If the unborn child were not a person, there would be no debate. But liberals want to avoid this controversy, and as long as the debate remains about life, liberals will ignore it. When it becomes about personhood, it must be answered, and this will break the present silence in the mainstream discourse, and the discussion will advance.
I couldn’t help myself, “NO! We’re trying to prevent one!” 
That is why the pro-aborts will not allow abortions to be shown on the MSM,notice everything else is.
