I’ve had the honor of writing about Advertising Standards Canada in the past. This wonderfully Canadian group, which carries out its self-proclaimed mandate in secret, was the focus of a story dealing with a newspaper ad documenting the wonderful antics of North American abortionists who kill unborn children then proudly sell off their body parts.
A complaint was filed by Joyce Arthur and her Pro-Choice Action Network, claiming that the ad was false and it made abortionists look bad.
Well, Advertising Standards Canada agreed that, yes, the ad made abortionists look bad. They refused to examine whether or not the ad was true or not. Arthur proclaimed her victory, exhibiting her usual intellectual dishonesty, never mentioning that the council, by its refusal to rule on the accuracy of the ad, was, in effect, saying it was true.
But it still made abortionists look bad.
As well they should be. Anyone who would dissect babies for parts has serious problems, the same kind we would worry about if an adult were pulling the wings off of flies.
But anyway, they’re back. Not the abortionists selling baby body parts – those we will always have with us. But Arthur and the Ad Council are back. This time, they have set their sites on the link between abortion and breast cancer.
It seems Joyce Arthur and the Pro-Choice Action Network don’t like an ad placed in the Surrey Now by Surrey-Delta Pro-Life. The ad documents the research by Dr. Joel Brind. It created quite a stir, even causing abortionist Ellen Wiebe to put down her bottle of pills and curettage and pick up a pen to write the paper a letter to the editor. Presumably, Wiebe found the time to write as she continued to clean up the public relations disaster when one of her RU-486 patients died in the past few weeks. But such is the life of an abortionist.
Anyway, Arthur claims that the ad in question contains “grossly deceptive claims and statements.” She then provides the “evidence” which includes material from such non-biased groups as Planned Parenthood, the Alan Guttmacher Institute and the Center for Reproductive Law and Policy.
Arthur is also quick to note that Dr. Joel Brind “is known to have a strong anti-abortion bias.” Presumably then, Arthur would think that an organization such as Planned Parenthood, which is a main player in the abortion industry itself, operating hundreds of abortion clinics and performing well over a hundred thousand abortions per year, is not biased.
Remember, this is the rep from a group that organized an anti-Catholic demonstration outside Vancouver’s Catholic cathedral and which has in its membership those who espouse the use of force and vandalism to silence the pro-life voice.
I would say the fundamental problem affecting Joyce Arthur and the Pro-Choice Action Network is stupidity. No wonder Arthur shakes at the prospect of debating such pro-life heavyweights as Scott Klusendorf. Arthur knows full well she would get creamed in any public debate on abortion.
Instead she uses her pen in appealing to such quasi-judicial groups as Advertising Standards Canada, a group that is apparently in the business of censuring pro-life statements it doesn’t like even if they are based on truth. Joyce Arthur, who boasts of her Mensa connections, doesn’t do their movement any credibility – she actually believes her own propaganda.
Meanwhile, women who have had abortions will continue to be stricken with breast cancer. How sad.
Now we wait for Advertising Standards Canada to decide if pro-lifers are allowed to tell women the truth about abortion.