Brian Mulroney did not attend debate or vote on July 28, 1988.  On August 2, 1988, reading from a prepared statement on an open line radio show in Vernon, B.C., Prime Minister Brian Mulroney declared:

“I do not favour abortion on demand.  I have recognized that, as the former statute specifies, abortions could be obtained in certain circumstances.”

Mr. Mulroney did not say under what circumstances he could support abortions.  The Prime Minister also said “It’s not a partisan matter.  It’s a matter of trying to seek common ground of reconciling opposing views to the extend that’s possible.”  And Again:

“In a pluralistic society” differing views “on this human issue” have to be considered and, therefore, “it is not up to me to impose my personal perceptions on the legislators.”

Three weeks later, on August 20, the Prime Minister declared in St. Hyacinthe, Quebec, that abortions should be allowed in cases of incest and rape and other “certain personal situations.”

A summary of the above statements shows that the Prime Minister, therefore: 1) accepts that Parliament has a right to legalize the killing of unborn babies and, therefore, makes morally acceptable what – by God’s law – is an abominable crime; 2) accepts the right of a woman to kill her unborn baby; 3) that circumstances which warrant this act of violence against new life include acts of violence perpetrated against the mother, plus “other certain situations;” 4), (a) that standards of right and wrong are arrived at by majority vote; (b) that the values of those who oppose killing of the unborn are no grater than the views of those who oppose it; (c) that principles of good and evil are personal and, therefore, should have no bearing on a politician’s behaviour.

Conclusion

The Conservatives have not passed party resolutions approving legalized abortion.  In 1979, on the last day of his nine-month tenure, the office of then Prime Minister Joseph Clark issued a statement similar to the position of the current Prime Minister.  Mr. Clark approved of legal abortions and following the Badgley Report of 1977, promised action for the equitable operation of the law,” i.e., providing facilities for abortion throughout the country.  During the 1984 election campaign, Mr. Mulroney also called for “equal access.”

John Turner

Like the Prime Minister, Mr. Turner was absent from the July 28, 1988 vote and the preceding debate.  On August 31, 1988, Mr. Turner refused to state his position on abortion, according to the newspaper of the next day.  On October 3, after the opening of the election campaign, he repeated that “his personal position on abortion is irrelevant.”  That, of course, does not mean that Mr. Turner does not have a position.’

Mr. Turner was Justice Minister in 1969 when the Liberal government legalized the killing of unborn babies “under certain circumstances.”

Fifteen years later, during the federal election campaign of 1984, Mr. Turner told the CBC Journal, “You know I am one of the architects of the abortion amendment…it’s a fair compromise” (March 16, 1984).  One wonders about the one millions unborn babies killed under this “fair compromise.”  Three months after that, June 15, Mr. Turner repeated that the 1969 law was “the best accommodation that could be made and that, if elected, he would see that it be “equally applied.”

Mr. Turner, like Mr. Mulroney, therefore, accepts parliament’s jurisdiction over life and death of the unborn, a woman’s “right” to have her unborn baby killed, a doctor’s “right” to commit the killing and society’s “right” to list such killing as a necessary medical service.”

Mr. Turner however, goes further than the Prime Minister.  When B.C. Premier William Vander Zalm refused to pay for abortions following the Supreme Court decision of January 28,1988, Mr. Turner urged the government to force the province “to ensure services are rendered on an equal basis across Canada.”

Conclusion

The voters of Vancouver Quadra should be encouraged to defeat Mr. John Turner.

Note on Party:

In 1969, when abortion was legalized, only two members out of 155 Lieberal MPs in the House voted against the measure.  The party has adopted pro-abortion resolutions from this or that sub-group, such as the Young Liberals.  In 1970, for example, a resolution was passed at the party policy convention calling for the removal of abortion from the Criminal Code.

The most recent party statement on abortion was issued on August 23, 1988, by the Secretary General of the Liberal Party, Marie-Andree Bastien, in reply to an inquiry.   It confirms Mr. Turner’s point of view.  It rejects the use of the override clause, Section 33 of the Charter.  It claims that because of different provincial reactions “an untenable situation has been created for Canadian women, who have the right to equal access to medical services.”

Says Miss Bastien, “In keeping with consistent Liberal policy in a wide variety of public policy fields, we believe that medical services should be available equally across the country.  The Supreme Court decision gives support to this point of view.”

The federal Liberal Party, therefore, see abortion (1) as a medical “service;” (2) as a “right; (3) as a service which must be universally available.  In other words, the position is that of approving abortion in general.  Fortunately, on October 3, 1988, Mr. Turner also stated: “Whatever we do, we will leave our candidates and our future MPs with a free vote.”

This is an improvement over the current aggressive, hard-nosed, pro-abortion policy imposed upon the province of Ontario by Liberal Premier David Peterson and his pro-abortion Cabinet.

Ed Broadbent

Attended the debates and the vote on July 28, 1988, where he and his party voted en bloc in favour of abortion on demand. Party discipline saw to it that no one strayed from the pre-ordained policy.

Mr. Broadbent – like other NDP leaders such as Ontario’s Bob Rae – constantly claims that he is not “pro-abortion.”  This  claim is mind-boggling because he clearly wants parliament to grant every woman the right to kill her unborn baby whenever she feels like it and the government to provide the facilities and funding to make this possible right across the country.  He is an admirer of Henry Morgentaler.

Both the leaders and the party’s ideological commitment to abortion on demand goes back 25 years to the mid-sixties.  In 1965, Stephen Lewis as NDP leader in Ontario, and in 1966 his father, David Lewis as future NDP leader in Ottawa, committed the party to approving the killing of unborn babies.  In November 1967, the federal NDP adopted abortion on demand as party policy.  It was and remains the only party to have done so. It has never wavered from this policy.

Over the years, small pockets of dissenting members here and there actually have proved useful to the party in leaving the impression that change might be forthcoming.  It allows the party to collect votes from people who otherwise might go elsewhere.  Of similar usefulness were NDP Catholic priests, MPs Andy Hogan (Cape Breton) and Robert Ogle (Saskatoon), whose presence reinforced the myth that the NDP was Christianity at prayer.

Not only is the party committed to giving women the right to kill their unborn babies, it is prepared to impose this view with force, if necessary.  In February 1988, the NDP spokesman on women’s affairs, Mrs. Marion Dewar, former Mayor of Ottawa and now MP for Hamilton Mountain, not merely objected to Premier Bill Vander Zalm’s opposition to abortion funding.  She also demanded that the federal government immediately suspend federal health payments to British Columbia (some $800 million) and thereby force the Premier to comply.

Conclusion

Mr. Broadbent’s defeat and the defeat of all his pro-abortion colleagues would be a true victory for the unborn.