Politics as politics have never interested me. I have lived as a citizen in three countries and have never belonged to a political party in any one of them. But I do come to life when moral and political issues blend into one, and this has certainly occurred in Canada with regard to abortion. So, I must admit that I am vitally interested in who will be the next prime minister of Canada, and in what position he or she will take on the rights of the unborn.
Although I was not in Canada in 1969 when the law was passed which left the unborn child virtually unprotected, I have read a great deal about how it came into being. Next to Mr. Pierre Trudeau who framed the bill, it was Mr. John Turner, as Minister of Justice, who was principally responsible for presenting it to Parliament.
Taxpayers and abortion
I have read that Mr. Turner considered that he was “merely” legalizing what was already a “medical” practice – the killing of a few unborn babies each year by abortion. According to Hansard, Mr. Turner was asked in the House if taxpayers’ money would pay for abortions, and he replied “Oh, no!”
Since that time – and as a direct result – of Mr. Turner’s infamous bill – the “few thousand” babies aborted annually have swollen to more than 60,000, and the Canadian taxpayer (no matter how opposed to abortion he or she may be) foots the bill for this unspeakable crime.
Surely, in the nine years he has been away from politics, Mr. Turner would have realized the appalling results of his Bill C-150? He must have read or heard that the hospital committees set up as a result of his Bill are a disaster for the unborn child. According to the Badgley Report, tabled in the House of Commons on February 9,1977, many physicians “openly acknowledged that their diagnoses for mental health were given for purposes of expediency and they could not be considered as a valid assessment of an abortion patient’s state of mental health.” (page 212).
Mr. Turner is a “practicing Catholic” (please don’t ask me to define that) and he cannot be ignorant of the strong position taken by his Pope and by the Second Vatican Council. I quote, “Abortion is an abominable crime … to attack unborn life at any moment from its conception is to undermine the whole moral order which is the true guardian of the well-being of man.”
As one who attends Mass every Sunday and – so I am told – is a lector in his Church, Mr. Turner cannot be unaware of the statements of the Catholic Bishops of Ontario. Here is just one: “Every human being is unique and priceless because made by God in the image and likeness of God. Every human life – let there be no mistake – is therefore fit to live for as long as the Lord of all life may choose. In the world designed by God there can be no such thing as a human being unwanted, unloved or useless.” Does Mr. Turner believe this?
Casual about death
On the day Mr. Turner officially entered the race for leader of the Liberal Party, I watched his interview with Barbara Frum of CBC’s “The Journal.” He was asked, “Would you, as Prime Minister, attempt to limit the abortion law?” I held my breath – but not for very long. Mr. Turner didn’t bat an eyelid, this is, in substance, what he answered, “I was the one who put the bill through in 1969. I think there must be occasions when abortion is justified – in the case of life or health of the mother. I think that therapeutic abortion is a fair compromise.” That was all …
The reply was as casual as if he had been asked, “would you change the speed limit on highway 401?” The impression one got was that over 60,000 Canadian babies done to death each year – more than one million since Mr. Turner’s Bill changed the law – were not worth discussing. Unemployment is, of course, the priority with Mr. Turner, and it certainly should be a priority. But the unemployed have votes, the unborn do not. Could that fact be significant?
Before somebody comes up with the objection, “But you are mixing religion with politics,” I would like to submit a prior question: “How many Gods can one man serve?”
