The Interim has been criticized by some for its editorial position against proportional representation. This comes as no surprise, considering the criticism that Campaign Life Coalition has received for years over its (similar) stance on the issue. People of goodwill can disagree on this issue; how we choose our politicians is a matter of tactics, not morality, and as such, a civil debate on the merits and flaws of proportional representation should take place. Indeed, this paper facilitated part of that debate in July with a yes/no feature on the question. Sadly, for some, this is not enough.
Some members and supporters of the Family Coalition Party are among our critics. That’s fine; a healthy debate among friends is always welcome.
Our concern, however, is that some in the party have become pre-occupied with electoral reform. We remind them, and the whole pro-life communtiy, that the FCP was established to provide a voice for the unborn in political debates and an ethical choice for voters on election day. By no means should support or opposition for proportional representation be regarded as a litmus test for who is pro-life and who is not.
Despite our different views on this tactic, the pro-life movement should be able to work together. After all, a much more important issue – the defence of human life – still unites us.
