For all the talk about the democracy deficit, there is a much greater deficit in the political arena: a morality deficit. Consider just two facts (for the sake of brevity): o In 2000, then-prime minister Jean Chretien declared that Canada had “social peace” on abortion, indicating that the debate was over. The blood of more than 110,000 unborn babies killed in the womb each year testifies to the falseness of such declarations, even if politicians imitate ostriches as they stick their heads in the sand. o In 2003, courts in Ontario and B.C. over-ruled 2,000-plus years of tradition, the stated intentions of Parliament and common sense as they re-defined marriage to include homosexual couples. To allow same-sex “marriages” – and civil unions — is to officially sanction inherently sinful relationships.

In both cases, the federal government failed the Canadian people by sanctioning immorality. Not since 1992 has Parliament considered legislation that would address the abortion issue; in 2003, it briefly considered a private member’s motion that would have required Parliament to explore whether abortion is medically necessary. That motion’s failure to pass was a sign of to what lengths Parliament will defend the state-sanctioned and taxpayer-funded immorality of abortion. It will take some time and much hard work to undo the abortion mentality in this country.

On the issue of same-sex “marriage,” Prime Minister Paul Martin seems content to let the issue be dealt with by the Supreme Court, which is nothing less than an intolerable abrogation of responsibility. In fairness to Martin, he is not unique; no political leader in Ottawa is willing to do what is necessary by invoking Section 33 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the notwithstanding clause, to signal to the country that on fundamentally important issues, Parliament will not cede it’s responsibilities to nine unelected judges. The official opposition, by and large, opposes same-sex “marriage,” but none of the leadership candidates has vowed to use the notwithstanding clause to maintain the traditional definition of marriage.

That politicians are unwilling to address issues such as protecting innocent human life or maintaining the sanctity of society’s foundational institution illustrates that whatever ails Canada’s democracy, its economy or its foreign policy, nothing threatens Canada’s future as much as its morality deficit. While governments may handle other policy issues well, our politicians turn away to ignore this moral crisis afflicting our nation.