I would like to recommend the following website : http://www.canadasilentnomore.com/. In particular, I would like to point out the large-spanning, comprehensive review that Canada Silent No More has put together regarding the mental and physical effects related to legal abortion. The ‘Facts and Stats’ section of the website, at first glance, is daunting and discouraging. However, it is important to note that these discomforting figures represent the truth about the terrible effects abortion can have on women. Given that many people base their decisions on ‘what the research shows’, it is impressive to see that an organization has devoted the time and energy to sift through a massive pile of research studies in order to inform women on various mental and physical effects of abortion.

When it comes to counseling women who are debating an abortion, I believe the best approach is to offer love, support, understanding, and resources (both emotional and financial, whenever possible). Nonetheless, attention also must be drawn to the scientific evidence that warns against abortion. The medical community cannot continue to shun its eye from the negative impacts of abortion. Many pro-choicers claim that pro-lifers are inventing the idea of a “post-abortion syndrome”…but if that’s really the case, why do numerous scientific studies show us otherwise? If the risk of breast cancer doubles after one abortion, and a 1997 government study from Finland showed that “women who abort are approximately four times more likely to die in the following year than women who carry their pregnancies to term”, shouldn’t women considering abortion be at least notified of these disastrous health consequences?

Let me re-iterate: the abortion debate is fundamentally about the life of the fetus. What we are defending, here at Quebec Life Coalition, is the unborn child’s right to life and protection. In addition to killing the lives of children, abortion also destroys the lives of many women (and men). In sharing the cited studies on http://www.canadasilentnomore.com/, what I seek is to spread greater awareness of the evils of abortion- but the primary wrong of abortion is that it kills a new human life- the fact that it hurts so many women too reveals the aftermath of actions that go against God’s love for all of us.

A wonderful day was had by the 50+ Montreal pilgrims who attended the annual March for Life in Ottawa, yesterday.

Motor coach ride from downtown Montreal to Ottawa via Pointe Claire, 10 a.m. Mass at the Notre Dame Cathedral, lunch in the food court at the Rideau Centre, gathering on Parliament Hill, march through the streets of downtowm Ottawa, reconvene on the Hill, return to our bus and ride to Montreal.

The mass was packed to the rafters. presided by archbishop of Ottawa, Mgr. Terence Prendergast, sj, presided along with seven other bishops, including Montreal's own Christian Lépine, and fifteen or so priests. Many of the faithful stood throughout the service.

After the celebration, Archbishop Prendergast greeted many of the pilgrims including a few from our own group. In this photo we see with his grace Christine Le Beau, Marc-Albert Bélanger, and Lucille Charette-Morga, who is sporting the white cap. In the fore plan is Mr. Marcel Givoque

After a lunch break, we walked up Wellington street and entered the grounds of the parliamentary buildings. There we gathered and milled about, listening to the various speakers. 

At about 1:30 p.m., the march began. Seen above are the walkers leaving Parliament hill and ...

... then proceeding through the cavernous streets of downtown Ottawa...

... returning to their starting point.

The website of Campaign Life Coalition, the march's organizer along with us and LifeSiteNews, states that over 19 500 people came to this year's march. This is 6000 more than last year!

Will you be with us next year?

I received the following email from R.E.A.L. Women of Canada. (The acronym stands for Realistic, Equal, Active, for Life.)

On the one hand, it summarizes the parliamentary debate about Mr. Woodworth's motion - C-312, this past Thursday, April 26, 2012.

On the other hand, it requests us to act. This non-partisan and non-denominational group is encouraging Canadians to write the Prime Minister to let him know that you support the motion.

It also suggests that we contact your Member of Parliament - MP.

I mailed a similar letter to both and, within days, I heard back from my MP - Honourable Stéphane Dion, but not the PM.

I encourage you to do likewise. Let me know what results you have had.

Here's a copy of the correspondance from REAL Women of Canada:

MP Stephen Woodworth Motion M-312 on Abortion MP Stephen Woodworth (Kitchener Centre) proposed in Motion M-312 that Parliament study when human life begins, by reviewing Section 223 of the Criminal Code, which provides the child becomes a human being once he or she is fully proceeded in a living state from the body of its mother.

In his Motion, Mr. Woodworth has proposed that a Parliamentary Committee be established to carry out this review of Section 223 which was included in the Canadian Criminal Code when it was passed into law in 1892. Section 223 was based on the English Draft Code of 1878, which in turn, was based on judge-made law (common law) decisions handed down in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. At that time it was necessary to decide when human life begins in order to determine whether a charge of murder could be laid on the death of a child. This definition then was based on the limited knowledge and standards of those previous centuries.

Modern science and technology have enormously broadened our knowledge of human life and development in the womb from that of the previous centuries. It is only reasonable, therefore, that a review of Section 223 of the Criminal Code should be carried out at this time in order to update the provision to conform to the present medical and technological knowledge.

Mr. Woodworth’s motion was given its first hour of debate on April 26, 2012. Prior to the debate that same day, during Question Period, Prime Minister Harper stated that he would vote against the bill and further stated, that it was unfortunate that the House of Commons committee had selected the Motion as being a votable one.

Conservative House Leader Gordon O’Connor spoke against the motion as did most of those speaking during that hour of debate. Opposition NDP leader Thomas Mulcair and Liberal Leader Bob Rae, spoke against the motion.

Outside Parliament during the debate, approximately 50 pro-abortion activists demonstrated against the Motion. Their demonstration received large media coverage from CTV, CBC, and Global Networks as well as the National Post, Globe and Mail and Toronto Star. It is notable that the latter media have studiously avoided coverage of the 15,000 + people rallying in front of Parliament during the annual March for Life event.

Another hour’s debate on the motion will take place possibly in early June or September 2012.

It is important that the Prime Minister and MP’s hear from the public about the importance of this Motion. It must not be shut down by a biased media and the pro-abortion activists, who do not want a debate on the critical issue of abortion in Canada.

Please contact the Prime Minister and your MP urging their support of Motion M-312.

The Right Honourable Stephen Harper, Office of the PM House of Commons, Ottawa, ON K1A 0A6 (Fax: 613-941-6900 E-Mail: Stephen.Harper@parl.gc.ca)

Your MP, House of Commons, Ottawa ON K1A 0A6

I invite you all to visit a new US pro-life site, abortionsafety.com. I am impressed with the work that has gone into collecting data for this site. Abortionsafety.com seeks to raise awareness of the risks and dangers of abortion for women. The site includes a compilation of many abortion malpractice cases recorded across the United States.

Women considering abortion should take a look at this site beforehand as it highlights many of the potential problems following abortion. The website includes a map of the United States- you can click on the state you live on or may travel to for an abortion to check if any of the clinics or doctors in the area have been accused of malpractice.

Abortionsafety.com also discusses alternatives to abortions and makes references to organizations that can help you locate a pregnancy resource centre across the U.S. Now if only there were something like this in Quebec... 

________________________________________________________________

More than ever, Quebec needs Quebec Life Coalition. This spring, Quebec Life Coalition needs you. Thank-you for making a donation.

The Catholic Bishops of Canada are apparently launching a country wide pro-life and pro-family initiative. They hope that in every diocese across the land Catholics will become more aware of the battle for Life raging in our culture and the importance of family. In the introduction page to this initiative the bishops conference asks various groups to submit ideas and aids to the conference as it seeks to put flesh on the bones of this new initiative.

I for one humbly sumbit the sermon below, as an example of both the tone and the content that I would seek in a homily that is more than vague platitudes about the cuteness of babies and the joys of family life. Obviously, not every sermon can be this politically charged, but these are no ordinary days, where canadians are forced, through their healthcare taxes, to fund the killing of unborn human beings and other actions that deeply offend their consciences. It is baffling to me why no one up here seems to have offered anywhere near the resistance that we are seeing, thanks be to God, from the bishops and pastors and laity down in the US as they fight the coopting of their own proposed universal HealthCare system by forces that want to kill the unborn.

I would like to bring to your attention two common inconsistencies in the pro-choice position. First, the typical pro-choicer refuses to recognize that unborn children deserve protection, yet is adamant in defending animal rights. Isn’t it a bit strange that a person feels so strongly about safeguarding animal life, and has no problem destroying human life in its initial stages of development?

According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, an animal is “any of a kingdom (Animalia) of living things including many-celled organisms and often many of the single-celled ones (as protozoans) that typically differ from plants in having cells without cellulose walls, in lacking chlorophyll and the capacity for photosynthesis, in requiring more complex food materials (as proteins), in being organized to a greater degree of complexity, and in having the capacity for spontaneous movement and rapid motor responses to stimulation.” A human embryo is “an organism in the early stages of growth and differentiation, from fertilization to the beginning of the third month of pregnancy (in humans).” This means that an embryo is, at the very least, a member of the animal kingdom. The fetus is defined as “An unborn offspring, from the embryo stage (the end of the eighth week after conception, when the major structures have formed) until birth,” so at the fetal stage, it is clear that this ‘animal’ is clearly part of the human species.

Upon considering this argument, it is evident that a person cannot be both vegetarian and pro-choice, at least not if they are vegetarian for moral reasons (dietary reasons aside). If you believe it is wrong to kill animals, you must also believe it is wrong to kill unborn children for they fall into the category of animal at minimum. Many people also refuse to eat animals or animal products for religious reasons…but do these people know that many big companies (example: Pepsi) perform research on aborted fetuses to create new flavors or products?

In Québec there has been a recent controversy over Islamic halal meat production. Halal meat requires that the throat of an animal be cut, letting it bleed to death.” The Parti Québecois (PQ) claims that both consumer rights and animal rights are at stake here, and that halal meat production facilities must be thoroughly examined. The PQ stated that "This type of slaughter slams directly against Québécois values." Isn’t it ironic that many Quebecers are concerned about animal suffering and the slaughter of animals, but do not take into consideration the potential suffering inflicted upon human life in every abortion?

A second point I would like to emphasize is the inconsistency in the trend of eating only organic, natural foods while simultaneously consuming contraceptive pills. Many people are rightfully concerned about the levels of synthetic pesticides and chemicals added to nutrition. However, these same people also tend to advocate the use of contraceptives such as the birth control pill, the morning-after pill, IUDs, and condoms. Again, we see a certain level of hypocrisy here. On the one hand, a person may argue that you have to be very careful with the food you put in your body, that it must be healthy and free of rubbish. On the other hand, this same person claims contraceptive pills should be available to all women, even though these synthetic hormones have been shown to produce some negative health problems. Sound familiar?

So next time you meet ‘Ms. Organic-animal-rights-lover’, please don’t forget to ask her what she (or he) thinks about contraceptive pills and abortion. Try to elucidate some of these inconsistencies. It seems that many people are fooled into defending animal rights but not human rights, and emphasize organic eating while willingly polluting their bodies with contraceptives. 

''Choose life, then, that you and your descendants may live'' Dt 30:19

Like every year for many years now, on the day of the Feast of the Annunciation, March 25th, or nine months before Christmas, we celebrate the Day of the sanctity of life. On this day, we enjoy life which is gift from God and we thank Him for it. This year, I would like to suggest that we celebrate this feast in a particularly fittng way : by spiritually adopting an unborn child threatened by abortion.

Spiritual adoption is a practical, affordable way for everyone to help save many unborn children in danger of being aborted. Even if they do not belong to our family, we are all children of the same God and brothers in Christ. The spiritual parents should make their "adopted children" happy, by praying for them.

Spiritual adoption consists of personal daily prayer during nine months for a child in danger of being killed by abortion. This commitment is made with a public promise to God, in the presence of a priest and a congregation, or if this isn't possible, individually at home. Each person undertaking this commitment is doing so for the protection and defence of a child whose identity is known only to God. Spiritual adoption is a form of expiation for the sins of infanticide and abortion, especially those committed by physicians, midwives, and nurses.

Anyone who has reached the age of reason may make this commitment. This includes children, once they have received their first communion.

Adoptive parents commit to pray one decade of the Rosary every day for nine months and in addition to recite the prayer for the unborn child. You could also perform an act of penance or saying an additional prayer every day for the same period of time.

The act of adoption:

O Most Holy Virgin Mother of God, Mary, all the Angels and Saints, inspired by the desire to defend unborn children, I firmly resolve to spiritually adopt a child whose name is known to God alone. I promise to pray every day for nine months from [MENTION DATE] so that the child's life may be spared whilst in the womb, and that she or he may live a just and righteous life after birth. I will fulfill this promise by praying one decade of the Holy Rosary, by performing an act of penance or saying an additional prayer. I will also say the prayer for an unborn child. I will begin all these things today.

PRAYER FOR AN UNBORN CHILD

Lord Jesus, through the intercession of Your Mother Mary, who with love gave birth to You, and of Saint Joseph, the man of trust, Your guardian and protector after birth, I offer my prayer to You for the unborn child, whom I have adopted spiritually, and who is in danger of being destroyed by abortion. I beg you, give its parents love and courage to let their child live the life that you have given to it. Amen

Margaret Somerville, director of the McGill Centre for Medicine, Ethics and Law, recently published an article in Ottawa Citizen titled "The profound complexities of informed consent to abortion.” 

This article is very well-written and represents a commonly overlooked problem in society: women who are pressured into having an abortion, and then manipulated into believing that their life will return to normal after the abortion.

First off, what is informed consent? Informed Consent is the ethical and legal obligation to inform a patient of all the benefits and risks involved in a medical procedure so that the patient can make the best decision regarding any medical intervention. As Margaret Somerville puts it, Informed Consent “requires that the harms, risks and benefits of the procedure, and its alternatives, including doing nothing, are disclosed.”

In her article, Margaret Somerville presents the case of Anna (not her real name), a 32-year-old woman who was made victim of abortion in Quebec. Before her abortion, Anna asked to see the ultrasound of her child but her request was refused. This contrasts with the regulations in several states in the U.S. which mandate that a woman see an ultrasound image of her child before her abortion or at least be offered the possibility to view it.

Anna was devastated after her abortion. She is currently seeking psychological help and she shared her story with Margaret Somerville to spread the word on the dangers of abortion. This is not a rare case- unfortunately, many women suffer the same distress but their stories are kept behind a curtain so as to not disturb the pro-abortion status quo.

Margaret Somerville writes:

Informed consent is not present if the information is inadequate - that's medical negligence (malpractice). And even non-material information must be disclosed if it is raised by a person's questions, which must be answered honestly and fully. Anna's request to see the ultrasound image is relevant in this latter respect. Consent is never present where intentionally false information is given, especially when it involves consequences and risks - indeed, this can give rise to the legal wrongs of battery and assault.

Should Québec have stricter laws on informed consent for abortion procedures? Considering that abortion is an irreversible decision, shouldn’t women be better assisted and informed about the risks involved in aborting their child? Let us reflect upon this last comment which Anna told Margaret Somerville, “When a woman is pregnant, from my experience, she is much more vulnerable, and thus can be 'pushed around' more easily. This should be taken into account when a clinic is looking to have consent from a pregnant woman." – does this resonate with your experience? Please let us know your thoughts and comments.

Sued for "defamation" in late 2010 by "pro-choice" Quebec priest Father Raymond Gravel, pro-life group Campagne Québec-Vie (aka Quebec Life Coalition) has recently submitted its written defense at the Superior Court in Joliette Quebec, where Father Gravel is incardinated.

"We refuse to compromise our principles. It's our duty to defend human dignity, however that may irk Father Gravel" states Georges Buscemi, president of Campagne Québec-Vie (CQV). The Joliette priest accuses CQV of having damaged his "dignity, honour and reputation." The popular priest is claiming $500,000 in damages.

CQV, via its president, is calling on all Quebecers and Canadians at large who value human life from conception until natural death, as well as freedom to speak the truth about life and family, to contribute to its defense fund. Buscemi remarks that many people have been "let down" by the priest thoughout the many years he has been in the French media spotlight. "We're calling on all those people who have written to us to share how scandalized they were by Raymond Gravel to send us a donation so that we can fight this lawsuit on their behalf, but especially on behalf of the unborn and the vulnerable targeted for euthanasia." 

The following (French language) documents are publicly available: 

Father Raymond Gravel's original lawsuit (explaining why he's suing Campagne Québec-Vie / Quebec Life Coalition)

Campagne Québec-Vie's written defense, as submitted to the Quebec Superior Court in Joliette, QC. 

An executive summary of the defense of LifeSiteNews, which is also named in the original lawsuit (in English). 

Quebec Life Coalition thanks everyone who can donate whatever amount to its defense fund and help stop Gravel from intimidating pro-life groups in Quebec. For Life and Family !