In the last attempt to prevent our country from falling into a tragic error, The Interim sent the following statement to all Canadian senators.
Interim editor Fr. Alphonse de Valk appeared before the Senate Committee on Legislation on January 21, 1991 and submitted the same statement
In a word swirling with pragmatic accommodations to evils of one kind or another, it is extremely difficult for anyone to act on principle. Yet we believe we must do so in the case of Bill C-43, no matter what is said or done, because of the noble principle that ‘one may never voluntarily do evil.’
The essential arguments against Bill C-43 put in the briefest of terms runs as follows:
• Bill C-43 re-legalizes abortion in principle, making it an inherently evil law. Therefore, the moral principle that one may never accept, approve, enact or vote for something which is inherently evil, applies.
• The possibility that, despite our arguments to the contrary, some good may be achieved by Bill C-43 does not invalidate its necessary rejection; this according to the same moral principle that it is forbidden to do evil even if good may come of it.
• The argument that is permissible to vote for Bill C-43 as the lesser of two evils is false. The principle of choosing the lesser of two evils only operates when there is no freedom of choice. This is never the case with abortion, either in choosing one, performing one, cooperating with one, or legislating for their general state approval.
• No legislator, therefore, may vote in conscience for Bill C-43.
• Legislators who profess Christianity and who vote for Bill C-43 offend both humanity and the tenets of their faith.
• Legislators who are Roman Catholic and who vote for Bill C-43 offend against humanity and Christianity. Moreover, by knowingly contradicting the specific and solemn directives of the Church’s Magisterium, they excommunicate themselves from the Church.