Sign up

Join Us in Defending Life and Family

Quebec Life Coalition defends the human person from conception until natural death.



The hush on post-abortion distress: unveiling the grief

After reading a letter submitted by a woman who had an abortion on, I could not help but think to myself, how many other women have a similar story to share? How many other women have come through the deep end and struggle to live in peace after a decision that tore their lives (and that of their child)?

I wish the platform for post-abortive issues were more open to public conversation. I feel that interaction with women who themselves made the ‘choice’ of aborting would help prevent struggling women from making the same devastating decision. Unfortunately, as it stands, the crime of abortion is only spoken of using so-called “politically-correct” (and morally fraudulent!) jargon: “freedom of choice”, “women’s rights” (and what about children’s rights?), “my body, my choice”...but how many women, men, and families have suffered from the killing of their unborn child?

Notice I say men and women- because yes, men are also hurt by the horrors of abortion, for when they conceive a new being with a woman, they willingly partake in God’s act of life- and when they neglect the existence of that tiny being and fail to support the woman they have physically committed to, they also suffer the guilt, frustration, and sadness that follows. 

A recent meta-analysis published in the British Journal of Psychiatry revealed that women having abortions experience an 81% increased risk of mental health problems. If anyone is wondering why Post-Abortion Syndrome is not spoken of or acknowledged by the medical community, one must also wonder what political motivations exist to hide the truth on the physical and psychological impacts of abortion.

A final point of interest: If the whole abortion industry really has in mind the best interest of women, why don’t they perform a regular post-abortive check-up to ensure that women are really free of mental and physical agony post-abortion? As far as emotional reactions are concerned, the The Montreal Morgentaler facility website simply states that if psychological persists after one week or so, you may need a referral for “post-abortion counselling”- so really, do they honestly believe that women resume life normally after aborting their child?

Be the first to comment.

Planned Parenthood: tearing children away from their parents

Imagine being a 14-year old girl in a crisis situation: pregnant and yearning for some help. You take a little trip to the website of the world's largest abortion provider - Planned Parenthood - in search of some assistance.

Upon landing on the site, you turn to the Abortion section. With fear and anxiety running through your mind, the following words catch your attention: "¨Parental Consent and Notification Laws." Under this section, Planned Parenthood insists on making it clear that if you are under 18, you can avoid involving your parents in the abortion decision in three ways: 1) by asking a judge to excuse you, 2) by finding a legal guardian to be notified in place of your parent, or 3) by proving that you are independent of the care of your parents.

My question to you: does this information protect or harm the minor who finds herself pregnant and alone? Suppose I am a 14-year old girl who is pregnant and in shock...does my "freedom" to have an abortion without consulting my parents allow me to make the best, most informed decision?

There are cases where a pregnant girl is abused or neglected by her parents - in this situation, the presence of another caring guardian or school counselor should be enforced with even greater emphasis. However, Planned Parenthood's website is not helping minors to find the assistance they is giving them bad advice and a false sense of security by encouraging the pregnant child to come to the abortion clinic in secret, without an adult. After this, she will have to bear the painful decision she made for the rest of her life.

I remember myself at age 14. I was a lot more impulsive. I made decisions based on my emotions- if I felt happy in the morning, I went out for a walk. If I felt sad and lonely, I'd eat chocolate and watch T.V. Were it not for the help of my parents, I'd probably still be engaging in those unhealthy habits...I wouldn't be who I am today because no one would have been there to nag me about the consequences of my actions and teach me how to respond with courage to life's difficulties.

Whether we like it or not, our parents shape our decisions. Without them, a child simply does not have the guidance necessary to make the best choice. So why does Planned Parenthood insist on conveying to minors that they do not need to involve their parents in the abortion decision? It looks like this baby-killing enterprise does not really want what is best for their underage clients - rather it seeks to push any parental input as far out of the decision as is Planned Parenthood really trying to "advance the right and ability of individuals and families to make informed and responsible choices"? I think not.

Be the first to comment.

“Right is right even if no one is doing it; wrong is wrong even if everyone is doing it.”

Today, as I hear Stephen Woodworth's call to reassess section 223 of the Criminal Code of Canada, I draw strength from the popular saying “Right is right even if no one is doing it; wrong is wrong even if everyone is doing it.” According to section 223 of the Code, (1) A child becomes a human being within the meaning of this Act when it has completely proceeded, in a living state, from the body of its mother, whether or not (a) it has breathed; (b) it has an independent circulation; or (c) the navel string is severed.

Do not be ashamed if you were unaware of this absurd definition of human existence- it is likely a discovery for many of us, and thanks to Stephen Woodworth, some light will be shed on this important, urgent issue.

Now, for all the pro-choicers out there, your first reaction at Woodworth's proposal may be scorn and could he bring up abortion again? Doesn't he get it? The abortion debate is closed, and we won it!

Although it is my firm belief that abortion is a most heinous crime that steals lives everyday, that is not Woodworth's point. Irrespective of faith, politics, or culture, the question at stake here is one that everyone must grapple with: What constitutes a human being? To the pro-choice side, Woodworth may look like a pro-life stinker, but he is nonetheless right in contesting our current definition of when a "child" becomes human.

Let us refer back to section 223. If a child only becomes human when it has completely left its mother's body, then it would be legally permissible to choke a child to death upon the first breath it takes when exiting the womb as long as his lower body is still stuck in his mother's abdomen. Agreed? Of course not! This definition is absurd because it doesn't line up with our most basic intuitions.

But let's get to the root of the issue: are the unborn human or not? Imagine a world where babies were born minutes after being know that this tiny organism will grow into a beautiful baby as long as you place it into a warm cave full of nutrients and protection. Would anyone dare to argue that this tiny being would fail to become a child and then an adult? The problem with the current legal definition of a human being is that it is deceitful; it evades responsibility from protecting human life. In short, this bad legislation just soothes the consciences of pro-choicers by masking the truth. If the unborn child were properly referred to as human, then abortionists would have to refer to themselves as murderers- and a country like Canada would have to admit to the legalization of the destruction of human life. 

It is not the first time in history that we undermine the value of human life. During the era of American Slavery, African American people were not given their full rights; they were treated as property to be sold and bought. In those times, slavery was not viewed as the injustice it is. So why are we making the same mistake again? Why are we treating human beings (the unborn) like property to be marginalized and sold in the service of our own ends? The answer is simply that we have the ability to kill unborn children...but it is not because we have the capacity to do something that we are allowed to do it. 

To say that the unborn child is not human till he leaves the mother's womb is a lie. It is a pervasive lie that has diseased the minds of many. I urge you to listen attentively to Woodworth's proposition; though he may seem to have his own political agenda, he is opening a debate that should concern us all.

Be the first to comment.