When Stephen Harper declared that he wouldn't allow abortion debate in the House of Commons; when he pledged to use "whatever influence he has" to keep abortion off the agenda, he probably pictured a handful of pro-life MPs introducing a private member bill to protect unborn babies. And he knew that in this situation, he wouldn't really need to use "whatever influence he has" to stop such a bill from coming to a vote. If anything, he wouldn't even have to direct any of his MPs to vote against the bill. Should the bill actually make it to the Order of Precedence, (a privilege that is usually granted to less than 1 in 10 private member bills and motions,) the opposition members of the standing committee on House Affairs would have enough votes to have the bill designated a "non-votable item" - just as it was done with the earlier version of the Unborn Victims of Crime Act - bill C-291 in the 39th Parliament.
Sure, during the past Parliament, there were still a few occasions when Stephen Harper was compelled to address the thorny issue. For example, when some of his MPs became too outspoken in their protest against awarding the Order of Canada to the chief butcher. Or when it was announced that the government would no longer support the Unborn Victims of Crime Act (just days before the election call, which killed all the outstanding legislation including bill C-484). Or even when Winnipeg MP Rod Bruinooge announced the formation of a new pro-life caucus in the House of Commons. Still, Harper could be sure that the pro-life wing of his party is well under control and he shouldn't worry about them putting the government in a position where it would have to take sides in the abortion debate.
And yet the abortion debate came back - in a way Harper could never imagine. It was brought back by the pro-aborts themselves. When the government chose to cut funding to an affiliate of the Planned Parenthood International, the opposition parties demanded an explanation. They refused to regard this as a mere cost cutting measure. Neither were they satisfied with a promise "not to shut the door" on contraception, which they managed to get from the Prime Minister after all. They wanted the government to publicly affirm its commitment to the cherished secular sacraments of contraception and abortion.
Yes, this was in the end a motion about abortion. It just wouldn't be possible to separate abortion from contraception if we were to fund an organization that supports both. Try to picture a government official coming to the Planned Parenthood International with a multimillion dollar cheque. Try to imagine his instructions: "Remember, this only goes to contraception, not to abortion. So I want to see all that money being spent on pills, not on potassium chloride injections. And when I say pills, I mean, those that prevent pregnancy, not those that induce miscarriage..." Sounds ridiculous, doesn't it? You either support both or you support none.
And our opponents know that. While the motion itself was worded so that it wouldn't have the word "abortion" in it, the Bloc MP Johanne Deschamps and the NDP MP Libby Davies were both talking not just about "family planning" but also about "access to safe abortions for women globally", sometimes - using both in one sentence. They knew exactly what they were going to vote for.
Luckily, the motion has been defeated. A rare canadian pro-life win. Three courageous Liberals — John McKay, Dan McTeague and Paul Szabo, deserve our special thanks for choosing to stand up for what's right even if it meant voting against the party line. Thanks to their efforts and thanks to the votes of 141 Conservative MPs, the government wasn't forced to choose between defying the opinion of the Parliament and backing down on their rare pro-life action.
But the debate itself isn't going to go away. In fact, the constant debate on whether or not we should "reopen" the debate on abortion is just that - a debate, even if some of our opponents refuse to accept it as such. Declaring a pro-life bill "non-votable" or blocking a pro-life presentation on campus won't help. The debate will be back in full force every time the pro-abortion ideology clashes with common sense. And if Ignatieff pledges to continue fighting for subsidized abortion and contraception as part of maternal health initiative, then we're likely to have yet another round of abortion debate - right in the House of Commons.
No comments:
Post a Comment