Wednesday, March 12, 2008

Fetal Rights - A Perfectly Valid Legal Objective

Yes, I'm talking about Canada. Contrary to what the pro-aborts say, the Supreme Court didn't declare restrictions on abortion unconstitutional. Neither did it "read in" so called "abortion rights" into the charter.
When the court struck down Canada's abortion law 20 years ago, Justice Bertha Wilson said plainly that protecting the fetus was "a perfectly valid legislative objective" and advised that "The precise point in the development of the foetus at which the state's interest in its protection becomes 'compelling' should be left to the informed judgment of the legislature."
So the Supreme Court struck down a particular abortion law which existed at the time, leaving it up to the Parliament to pass another (more equitable) law instead. In fact, such bill was introduced by the Mulroney government, but it was defeated by the Liberal dominated Senate.

After Mulroney, the Liberals (as well as their allies from the left) did their best to convince Canadians that a legal vacuum on the whole issue of abortion is the way the Supreme Court mandated it to be. But the truth is - fetal rights remain a perfectly valid legal objective. The Parliament has all the rights and powers to pass a new abortion law, once there are enough MPs and Senators willing to do so.

No comments: