Speak Up: They Can’t Hear You on the Hill

Recently, I had the opportunity to meet with a local MP to discuss the upcoming vote on Motion 312.  For those who aren’t familiar with it, Motion 312 proposes the formation of a committee to discuss the Criminal Code’s definition of when human life begins.  At present, the definition is scientifically out-of-date, declaring:

“A child becomes a human being…when it has completely proceeded, in a living state, from the body of its mother…” (Section 223 of the Criminal Code of Canada)

The wording of this is so bizarre that I’m surprised a committee hasn’t tackled it already.  What are they suggesting the ‘child’ is before it’s a human being?  What species is a woman carrying for those nine months?  Technology has given us amazing insights into human development in the womb.  Anyone performing pre-natal surgery, or viewing an ultrasound image, would be hard-pressed to argue that the unborn child is not a human.

Though the MP I spoke with didn’t disagree with me there, he did state that Canadians found the current Criminal Code to be ‘acceptable’, and indicated that most people in the riding agreed with him.

I don’t know about you, but I certainly don’t find it ‘acceptable’ that the current Criminal Code is in direct conflict with biology and sound logic.  Clearly, I’m not the only one: a 2011 poll by Abacus Data showed that 59% of Canadians advocate legal protection for children at some point before their birth.  An astonishing 72% said the same thing in a 2011 poll by Environics.  In each poll, almost 30% believed that such protection should be offered from the point of conception onwards.  Clearly, Canadians are not on board with the unscientific, absurd oddity parading around as law.  Why, then, are our government representatives not aware of this?

I’ll be honest – at 23 years old, I had never met with an MP before.  I have a hunch that there are a lot of youth out there who are not familiar with local politics.   However, in a society where often only the loudest are heard, I think we need to be considerably louder.  We can respectfully make our views known to our local representatives, so they’re no longer laboring under the illusion that they’re accurately representing the views of their riding.  We need to get involved with pro-life activism, to show that we are not okay with the current lack of abortion legislation.  We can become involved on the provincial level as well, and make it known that we do not think our tax dollars should go towards funding abortion on demand.

There are certainly many branches of the pro-life movement that are worthy of our attention.  It’s crucial to talk to individuals, and change people’s minds one at a time.  It’s important to spend time supporting women in crisis pregnancies, and to continue supporting them once their children are born.  However, the law needs to change too.  Every day that abortion is still legal in our country, and our tax dollars are going towards it, we carry the weight of responsibility on our shoulders.

At the end of the day, the goal is to have a country where abortion is recognized as the murder of a human being – recognized both in the hearts of its citizens, and in its law.  In order to achieve this, we need to speak up, shake ourselves out of complacency, and make sure our MPs know that the current state of things is not ‘acceptable’.

For more information on Motion 312, and how to contact your local MP, visit letsstopthepretense.com.  Send an e-mail, call them on the phone, or meet them in person — let them know that you support Motion 312, and you hope that they will too.

 

 

 

 

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Speak Up: They Can’t Hear You on the Hill

  1. Charles Lehmann says:

    Actually, section 223 seems pretty cut and dried to me. It doesn’t deny that the unborn baby is human, just that it’s not yet a ‘person’.

  2. Rob says:

    Please vote for Motion 312 by Stephen Woodworth here: http://www.beavoice.ca
    Remember that your entire family can vote, they do not have to be 18 years or older. This is important, please spread the word. Thanks!

  3. Kyle David says:

    I finally found this post again, so: Dear Hanna,
    Regarding this: “At the end of the day, the goal is to have a country where abortion is recognized as the murder of a human being – recognized both in the hearts of its citizens, and in its law.” There are situations where abortion has become the only option , where the mother will die if they don’t get an abortion. Would you really jail a mother that was forced through terrible circumstances to kill her child in order to survive? Haven’t they been through enough? Here is one instance of a woman who was in a place where abortion had successfully been criminalized, and she died because she was denied the abortion that would save her life: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/14/savita-halappanavar-death-irish-woman-denied-abortion-dies_n_2128696.html If that wasn’t bad enough, the child died too, so no “sanctity of life” was preserved.
    I hate that these circumstances exist, where mothers must kill their children to survive. It’s awful. But what’s worse is that even when trying to save the child, it doesn’t always work. I apologize for not having a direct link to this, but this was the second story I heard where a mother was denied an abortion and due to complications the child died too. I would love if there was a way to stop these cases from occurring at all, but until the point where they have been eliminated for all time, abortion should not be illegal.
    If your group does eventually help to make Canada a place where abortion is illegal, you will have a hand in every mother that dies because they don’t want to end up in jail over getting an abortion, and every death from the back alley abortion clinics that women WILL seek out if abortion is ever criminalized because they will be the only option they have to live. Currently, abortion clinics hire well trained doctors who follow proper regulations and procedures to do as little harm as possible to the mother, but if these clinics are gone there will be no regulatory body to make sure the people performing abortions are being safe about it.

  4. Kyle David says:

    Here is what Canadian law has to say about self defense: “If you had a reasonable belief this person will hurt you, then you can justify killing them,” he says, but adds you would have to be in a situation where “if you don’t do something you’re going to be hurt or killed.” I feel this should apply to cases where the “person [that] will hurt you” is an unborn child. If carrying a child to term will kill you, and you know this, then under self defense laws, you are 100% legally allowed to terminate the pregnancy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *