News

I wonder if someone can point out to Isabelle Maréchal the inconsistency in her editorial endorsing assisted suicide in today's Journal de Montréal.

I see a couple of flaws.

At the outset she rightly laments the present deplorable state of our elderly population right here in La belle province.

• Lack of humane treatment in our hospitals and long term health facilities.
• Many suffering from lonelinees.
• Suicide among the elderly is on the rise.

Yet she endorses a permanent solution - assisted suicide, to a temporary problem.

Even more baffling in her logic is the inconsistency of her claims. First she expressies her empathy for persons she does not know.  Rightly so. We live in a community and have cares and concerns for our fellow human beings, whether these be beggars in our Metro or those dear family members.

Yet the inconstancy in her logic arrises in her concluding thoughts. Seemingly oblicious to the compassion she hs just endorsed, she argues that she is prepared to end her own life if condiitions are decrepit.

Vivat l'individualismum!

The National March for Life Ottawa will be held this year on Thursday, May 10, 2012. Last year over 15 000 people converged on our nation's capital to call for an end this senseless killing of a human being.

If you are interested in participating yet do not wish to drive up yourself, consider joining us on our chartered bus.

Our deluxe coach will leave from Montreal's downtown Via Rail Central Station (935 de la Gauchetière West) on Thursday, May 10 at 7:00 AM, and return to Montreal at the same location for about 6 PM. Round-trip tickets are $30 per person.

For those of you living on the West Island or Laval, you needn't travel downtown to board. We will make a second pick up on the way to Ottawa at the Fairview Shopping Center - corner Highway 40 and St. John Boul.

To reserve, call Quebec Life Coalition at (514) 344-2686. Payment guarentees you a seat on a coach.

Join us this year in Ottawa as we gather under the theme that "Abortion hurts Everyone."

I invite you all to visit a new US pro-life site, abortionsafety.com. I am impressed with the work that has gone into collecting data for this site. Abortionsafety.com seeks to raise awareness of the risks and dangers of abortion for women. The site includes a compilation of many abortion malpractice cases recorded across the United States.

Women considering abortion should take a look at this site beforehand as it highlights many of the potential problems following abortion. The website includes a map of the United States- you can click on the state you live on or may travel to for an abortion to check if any of the clinics or doctors in the area have been accused of malpractice.

Abortionsafety.com also discusses alternatives to abortions and makes references to organizations that can help you locate a pregnancy resource centre across the U.S. Now if only there were something like this in Quebec... 

________________________________________________________________

More than ever, Quebec needs Quebec Life Coalition. This spring, Quebec Life Coalition needs you. Thank-you for making a donation.

A special notification for all mothers and pregnant women in Chateauguay, Québec:

The local pregnancy center, Options, will be giving out clothing for children aged 0-3, baby supplies, toys, and maternity clothes to pregnant women and mothers in need on April 14th, 2012, between 10a.m. and 1p.m.

Their address is 25 Anjou Boulevard, Chateauguay. First-come, first served There will be coffee and cookies. For more information please call 450-699-4357.

Today in the Montreal Gazette an article was published presenting the viewpoints of two former sex workers in response to Ontario's recent brothel ruling.

Though the feminists' camp is split on the issue of prostitution, I think it is important to listen attentively to the testimonies of these women who admit having been hurt and victimized by prostitution.

“This isn’t a choice and it’s not a job,” said Julie (not her real name). “There’s no more security in doing this inside a bordello.”

"The violence against women is not on the street, it’s between four walls,” said Marie. “There are escort services, massage parlours, all operating now with organized crime and street gangs. Bordellos will be the same.” 

Notice that Marie (not her real name) clearly calls prostitution "violence against women." The fact that Marie and Julie had to appear incognito infront of the press, covered with hats and sunglasses, reveals that these women feel imminent danger of harrassment and stigma.

The issue with legalizing bordellos is not only that it will fail to protect women from sexual predators - it will also give power to the consumers, making them feel that they have a right to use the bodies of others for their own pleasure, thereby giving them greater authority to abuse the 'commodity' they have paid for.

Finally, Marie and Julie both emphasized the fact that bordellos will lure in a great number of young girls which may dramatically increase the number of underage prostitutes. 

"Bordellos will attract the young, the thin, the cute – and the laws making solicitation a crime will still target the older, less attractive women on the street", Marie said.

“Minors are going to still be in prostitution and their numbers will increase,” said Julie, who was a sex worker from 16 to 18.

I thank these two women for voicing their concerns and expressing the pain of their personal experiences. I hope that more women (and men) who have suffered from the damage of prostitution will speak up against this terrible issue which scars our society.

Last week, a government-sponsored commission recommended that assisted-suicide be legalized in Quebec for certain groups of people. As if that were not enough bad news, yesterday, an article in the National Post informed us that prostitution has been legalized in Ontario. The article states: “the Court of Appeal for Ontario swept aside some of the country’s anti-prostitution laws saying they place unconstitutional restrictions on prostitutes’ ability to protect themselves.”

Specifically, this decision implies that within a year, the Canadian Criminal Code will be amended to allow the existence and operation of brothel houses for prostitutes.

“The landmark decision means sex workers will be able to hire drivers, bodyguards and support staff and work indoors in organized brothels.” Nonetheless, exploitation by pimps and soliciting customers on the streets remains illegal.

This decision truly shocks me. There is no logic in claiming that we can protect prostitutes by legalizing brothel houses. This will only increase the number of prostitutes, underage sex workers, pornographic pimps and sadomasochistic activities in our society. It is terrifying to see the twisted mentality that pervades our country today. Prostitution is illegal and dangerous for everyone involved - it is not a personal choice - it is the result of an aura of oppression, misogyny, mental disorder, and abuse of the body. Though I can understand how the legalisation of brothel houses deceitfully resembles a solution on the surface, it really opens the doors to so many further problems.

First off, what kind of an image do we give off to other nations if we legalize prostitution houses? We are saying “This is fine. We support prostitution. We even defend it in our laws.” Second, how can our children be protected from the risk of prostitution if their own nation makes it legal to work in a prostitution home? Clearly, legalizing prostitution means that more future children will be dragged into a lifestyle choice that is degrading and sinful. Third, the allowing of brothel houses will encourage prostitution simply because it will be deemed socially acceptable and it will be more readily available to any member of the public. Finally, it saddens me to say this but it is true: prostitutes, pimps, and customers need serious mental help to receive healing for their unhealthy, harmful lifestyles. Not only does the rate of sexually transmitted disease increase with the number of partners, but countless cases of physical abuse and mental agony result from the crime of prostitution too.

Let us not forget that even if prostitution becomes legalized in Quebec, it will remain forever a crime against God. Prostitution harms yourself and your neighbor. It does not respect the dignity of the human body with which we are created. It turns the body into a slave of sexual pleasure. We are in great need of renewal- please pray for the conversion of hearts.

I would like to bring to your attention two common inconsistencies in the pro-choice position. First, the typical pro-choicer refuses to recognize that unborn children deserve protection, yet is adamant in defending animal rights. Isn’t it a bit strange that a person feels so strongly about safeguarding animal life, and has no problem destroying human life in its initial stages of development?

According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, an animal is “any of a kingdom (Animalia) of living things including many-celled organisms and often many of the single-celled ones (as protozoans) that typically differ from plants in having cells without cellulose walls, in lacking chlorophyll and the capacity for photosynthesis, in requiring more complex food materials (as proteins), in being organized to a greater degree of complexity, and in having the capacity for spontaneous movement and rapid motor responses to stimulation.” A human embryo is “an organism in the early stages of growth and differentiation, from fertilization to the beginning of the third month of pregnancy (in humans).” This means that an embryo is, at the very least, a member of the animal kingdom. The fetus is defined as “An unborn offspring, from the embryo stage (the end of the eighth week after conception, when the major structures have formed) until birth,” so at the fetal stage, it is clear that this ‘animal’ is clearly part of the human species.

Upon considering this argument, it is evident that a person cannot be both vegetarian and pro-choice, at least not if they are vegetarian for moral reasons (dietary reasons aside). If you believe it is wrong to kill animals, you must also believe it is wrong to kill unborn children for they fall into the category of animal at minimum. Many people also refuse to eat animals or animal products for religious reasons…but do these people know that many big companies (example: Pepsi) perform research on aborted fetuses to create new flavors or products?

In Québec there has been a recent controversy over Islamic halal meat production. Halal meat requires that the throat of an animal be cut, letting it bleed to death.” The Parti Québecois (PQ) claims that both consumer rights and animal rights are at stake here, and that halal meat production facilities must be thoroughly examined. The PQ stated that "This type of slaughter slams directly against Québécois values." Isn’t it ironic that many Quebecers are concerned about animal suffering and the slaughter of animals, but do not take into consideration the potential suffering inflicted upon human life in every abortion?

A second point I would like to emphasize is the inconsistency in the trend of eating only organic, natural foods while simultaneously consuming contraceptive pills. Many people are rightfully concerned about the levels of synthetic pesticides and chemicals added to nutrition. However, these same people also tend to advocate the use of contraceptives such as the birth control pill, the morning-after pill, IUDs, and condoms. Again, we see a certain level of hypocrisy here. On the one hand, a person may argue that you have to be very careful with the food you put in your body, that it must be healthy and free of rubbish. On the other hand, this same person claims contraceptive pills should be available to all women, even though these synthetic hormones have been shown to produce some negative health problems. Sound familiar?

So next time you meet ‘Ms. Organic-animal-rights-lover’, please don’t forget to ask her what she (or he) thinks about contraceptive pills and abortion. Try to elucidate some of these inconsistencies. It seems that many people are fooled into defending animal rights but not human rights, and emphasize organic eating while willingly polluting their bodies with contraceptives. 

Margaret Somerville, director of the McGill Centre for Medicine, Ethics and Law, recently published an article in Ottawa Citizen titled "The profound complexities of informed consent to abortion.” 

This article is very well-written and represents a commonly overlooked problem in society: women who are pressured into having an abortion, and then manipulated into believing that their life will return to normal after the abortion.

First off, what is informed consent? Informed Consent is the ethical and legal obligation to inform a patient of all the benefits and risks involved in a medical procedure so that the patient can make the best decision regarding any medical intervention. As Margaret Somerville puts it, Informed Consent “requires that the harms, risks and benefits of the procedure, and its alternatives, including doing nothing, are disclosed.”

In her article, Margaret Somerville presents the case of Anna (not her real name), a 32-year-old woman who was made victim of abortion in Quebec. Before her abortion, Anna asked to see the ultrasound of her child but her request was refused. This contrasts with the regulations in several states in the U.S. which mandate that a woman see an ultrasound image of her child before her abortion or at least be offered the possibility to view it.

Anna was devastated after her abortion. She is currently seeking psychological help and she shared her story with Margaret Somerville to spread the word on the dangers of abortion. This is not a rare case- unfortunately, many women suffer the same distress but their stories are kept behind a curtain so as to not disturb the pro-abortion status quo.

Margaret Somerville writes:

Informed consent is not present if the information is inadequate - that's medical negligence (malpractice). And even non-material information must be disclosed if it is raised by a person's questions, which must be answered honestly and fully. Anna's request to see the ultrasound image is relevant in this latter respect. Consent is never present where intentionally false information is given, especially when it involves consequences and risks - indeed, this can give rise to the legal wrongs of battery and assault.

Should Québec have stricter laws on informed consent for abortion procedures? Considering that abortion is an irreversible decision, shouldn’t women be better assisted and informed about the risks involved in aborting their child? Let us reflect upon this last comment which Anna told Margaret Somerville, “When a woman is pregnant, from my experience, she is much more vulnerable, and thus can be 'pushed around' more easily. This should be taken into account when a clinic is looking to have consent from a pregnant woman." – does this resonate with your experience? Please let us know your thoughts and comments.

Today, a 180-page report was released by the Dying with Dignity Committee suggesting that the Quebec's attorney general recommend to the Crown in Quebec that assisted-suicide be legalized. This is bad news for the pro-life side…it is the beginning of the second wave of societal degeneration. First, the unborn can be killed for any reason and at any time. Now, the elderly and those with “intolerable pain” are going to be allowed to request an assisted suicide. Soon, anyone who deems that their life is not worth living (or any person who has caregivers that wish to see them gone) will be euthanized or assisted in suicide. This means that, eventually, even children (such as is already the case in the Netherlands, google "Groningen protocol"), people with mental health problems ("incurable disease, psychological "distress"), adults (again, the "psychological distress" criterion, with the tenuous "incurable disease" criterion to be dismissed soon enough) and the elderly (see the "Free Will" initiative gaining steam in the Netherlands) alike will all be made victims of a system where people are treated as commercial goods that can be eliminated once no longer valid or wanted. If this seems like an over-reaction, you just haven't been keeping up with developments...

For further enlightenment on this topic, I invite you to read “EUTHANASIA AND ASSISTED SUICIDE: WHY NOT?", an interesting and informative document which offers quick answers to common arguments regarding euthanasia.

Below I have included some snippets of this document which I believe help in elucidating the problem of euthanasia and assisted suicide (please note that I have reworded some of the questions/concerns for the sake of brevity- the original formatting of the questions can be viewed in the document indicated above.)

“It is my choice” ----“Such a law would be a guaranteed recipe for abuse of the vulnerable; it would be incapable of protecting them from coercion by family members and others.” (page 3)

“I want to die with dignity” ----“We all have the power to respond with friendship, love and solidarity to the illness of others in order to uphold and protect their “right to life” until the moment of natural death. We need each other in death as we need each other in life.” (page 4)

“I don’t want to be hooked up to machine if it is time for me to die” ---“The withdrawal or withholding of extraordinary or disproportionate treatment, when its burdens outweigh its benefit, is not euthanasia because the intention is not to cause death but to allow the person to die naturally; in euthanasia the intention is to cause death – the patient does not die naturally but rather is killed by another human being before his or her time…There is a great difference between allowing to die and making die.” (page 5)

“I want control over when I die” – “Our society has always reached out to suicidal citizens who need help in living, not help in dying. It would be quite a contradiction to continue funding distress centers and suicide prevention programs while legalizing assisted suicide. If people chose to die while temporarily depressed or in intense pain, instead of receiving proper medical attention, they will potentially be deprived of many good years of life.” (page 6)

“Why force someone to suffer pain?” ---“We need to eliminate the pain, not the patient. Pain relief medications used appropriately rarely shorten life; the patient usually dies from his or her underlying disease. There is a huge difference between giving drugs to relieve pain and suffering, and intentionally using pain relief treatment to euthanize a person.” (page 7)

“I don’t want to burden my family” ---“The fear of being a burden is the key reason why some people ask to have their death hastened. Many Canadians also feel abandoned and are very isolated. They need to be consoled, encouraged and comforted.” (page 10)

“If euthanasia is already happening in our country, wouldn’t it be better to legalize it?” --- “If euthanasia is being carried out against the law, this shows that the law is incapable of controlling euthanasia. Legalizing euthanasia will not fix this problem. Providing government sanctions for euthanasia will endorse a practice that will harm the most vulnerable members of society and devastate the institution of medicine.” (page 12)

“Why are you imposing your religious values?” Euthanasia is not a religious issue, but a human rights issue. “The Universal Declaration of Human Rights clearly states that “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person” (art. 3). In order to uphold this right for all citizens, at this moment in Canadian history when we are faced with the prospect of legalizing euthanasia and assisted suicide, we need to (1) encourage new research and education on pain relief; (2) provide public funding for more palliative care centers and units in order to ensure that all Canadians have access to end of life care; (3) and develop fiscal measures to allow primary care givers to commit themselves freely to the support of their sick or dying loved ones.” (page 14)

Killing cannot be the solution to disease and suffering. Human life must be valued and protected in all circumstances- euthanasia and assisted suicide threaten this most fundamental human right. If you are a resident of Quebec, please voice your stance against euthanasia and assisted suicide by calling your MPP.

Yesterday afternoon, at the 40 Days for Life prayer vigil, four vigilers were swarmed by a throng of disgruntled university students. After this experience I better appreciate the meaning of spiritual warfare.

Here's what happened:

At about 4:45 p.m., shortly after having returned from a break, I heard some ominous sounds getting louder and louder. It didn't sound good.

My fears were realized, as at least 60 to 70 youth appeared walking up St-Laurent Boulevard and on reaching the intersection with St-Joseph crossed over into the park and besieged our prayer site. We were four vigilers at the time - three men and one older woman, and wherever we turned there they were - in front, behind, to our right, to our left.

The crowd was raucous. Led with blowhorn, chants were sung. Many motorists encouraged them on and the mob reacted jubilantly whenever a car horn was blown.

After a while many of the youth began to crowd our banner, leaning on its sturdy yet not unbreakable PVC support frame. My supplication to be cautious seemed to spur many on to do the opposite; these began to uproot the frame and untie the banner. I suspect that had I not stood on the unfurled banner its fate would have been worse than footprints and a twelve inch gash.

The outcome of our other materials was not as kind. Several struts of the frame were stolen. Our enlarged fetal picture despite being broken in two was saved from any further damage by one of the vigil participants.

Unfortunaley the other end piece did not fare as well. Below are before and after pictures of the other end piece - the one advertising our toll-free help line. 

Where were the police in all of this, you may wonder. No fewer than ten police cruisers stood by watching from the sidelines. Sgt. Filion explained later that he did not order an intervention because he did not have the numbers to do so. And so, for over an hour the vigilers prayed and tried to dissuade the youth as much as they could.

For the better part of the hour, we prayed on our own. Then Philip, one of the vigil participants, suggested that he and I pray Saint Patrick's Breastplate Prayer. As we began to do so and throughout its recitation, a young woman protester began howling, trying to break our concentration. To no avail.

Upon finishing, this woman disappeared and what can accurately be described as intelligent conversation began between myself, Philip and five or six of the young folk.

At 6 p.m. the crowd began to disperse and a few of our reinforcements appeared. At this point we decided to resume our vigil and, minus the frame, held aloft our banner.

Police levied fines on three of the young people.

Some pics of the event: