Tag Archives: advocacy

Flags on the Hill

IMG_20141002_080245This morning, members of uOttawa Students for Life joined almost one hundred other volunteers from We Need A Law to plant 100,000 blue and pink flags on Parliament Hill. Each of these flags represents one of the 100,000 children killed by abortion in Canada every year since the Morgentaler decision in 1988.

The children represented by these flags were not much loved in life, and have rarely been remembered in death, except perhaps by their mothers and fathers, many of whom grieve by the loss of their children to abortion. But for most of us, these children’s lives ended so soon after they began that their deaths passed us by unnoticed and largely uncared for. 

Today we took a stand to remember these children and to witness to the injustice committed against them. These children will never laugh or cry. They were never read a book or watch a play. They will never see a sunset. And they will never feel the embrace of the one they love. They were killed before any of that. They are victims of our individualist and consumer culture, as are their parents. But they will not go unremembered, at least not while we have anything to say about it.

Because we are pro-life. We want the unwanted. We defend the defenceless. And we witness to the beauty, the power, and the meaning of every single human life from conception till natural death.


Call to Action on Assisted Suicide

From NCLN:

Action Needed: BC Court Strikes Down Assisted-Suicide Ban

On Friday June 15th, the B.C. Supreme Court passed judgment on the Carter v. Canada Case. As Will Johnston, Chair of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition of B.C., stated in a National Post opinion piece, the decision “purports to create constitutional immunity for those who provide assistance to those seeking to kill themselves — a judgment that stands at odds with the Supreme Court of Canada’s Rodriguez ruling in 1993. …. Current law will stand for at least a year (the sole exception being the plaintiff in this case, 64-year-old ALS patient Gloria Taylor)”.

Allowing euthanasia and assisted suicide in our country directly threatens the lives of people with disabilities as well other vulnerable people in our society, and opens up further avenues for elder abuse.

A recent press release from the Canadian Association for Community Living concerning the Carter case decision stated, “Our concern, therefore, is that rather than advancing equality rights for Canadians with disabilities, this ruling will have quite the opposite effect. We fear that by embedding in Canadian law the message that some forms of human life are less worth living, the historic disadvantages faced by Canadians with disabilities that the equality rights provisions of the Canadian Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms were to address, will only be more deeply entrenched.”

We need you to raise awareness about the harms of legalized euthanasia and assisted suicide:
Sign this petition to the Attorney General of Canada, requesting that he adopts the strongest possible opposition to the legalization of assisted suicide and euthanasia
Read these talking points provided by the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, and send letters to your local media outlets outlining your opposition to the court’s ruling as it is a recipe for elder abuse, and creates a slippery slope which discriminates against people with disabilities and leaves them at risk
Contact the Justice Minister, the Honourable Robert Nicholson, asking him to stay the Carter decision and appeal it to the BC Court of Appeal
Become educated on this issue by checking out some of these articles and resources.

We hope you will do all you can to make your voice known in this matter. Our society has ultimately failed if our solution to problems is to eliminate the sufferer, rather than find measures to alleviate their suffering.

“What does it mean to give informed consent to one’s own death?
Is it meaningful to say that we can appreciate and understand the nature and consequences of that decision, when that decision means that we will no longer be here?
Isn’t autonomy about the right to non-interference, in the name of protecting one’s integrity, not undermining it?
Doesn’t the right to self-determination only find meaning because we wish to lay claim to our future?”
~Michael Bach, Executive Vice-President,
Canadian Association for Community Living

Also, check out the personal, thought-provoking piece by NCLN’s Executive Director, a uOSFL alumnus.

Pro-Life Day of Silent Solidarity

by Dante De Luca

It has been a tradition at uOSFL for the past two years to participate in the annual Pro-Life Day of Silent Solidarity. This year, however, it seems to have slipped our minds, most likely due to the flurry of recent events (notably our Debate and the GAP affair at Carleton University).

Pro-Life Day of Silent Solidarity: uOSFL 2009

So, despite the fact that we are not congregating in the cafeteria with red duct tape over our mouths today, I still encourage each and every one of you to take a moment of silence today to remember those who will never have a voice.

The Results Are In!

uOSFL wants to get your opinion. We value it. As such, we are running a series of polls in order to better see what our readers and members think.

Our first poll closed this morning. Thank you to all who voted!

Our second poll opened this morning. We would encourage you all to vote as well.

The results of the first poll:

Since our audience is by far the most deeply concerned about unrestricted access to abortion, we ask you to answer our second poll, which is available on the right hand side of the page:  What kind of events should we be focusing on in order to erradicate this horrible problem?

Thank you!

uOSFL Leadership Team

“Human Beings Are Not Commodities”

by Reita S.

[While this is not strictly within the parameters of uOSFL’s mission, in light of the recent poll uOSFL produced, I thought it would be important to say a few words about human trafficking and the sex trade.]

I spent most of my life in a blissful ignorance about the realities of human trafficking. I knew that there were prostitutes all over the world, but I had never seen one. I heard stories now and then of child prostitution, but my mind filtered this to mean older teenage girls, not six year olds.

I was swiftly shown the light when I discovered the organization Love146. They are dedicated to rehabilitating, healing, and training former child prostitutes after they are liberated from brothels. In their e-book on slavery, they rightly state that “Human beings are not commodities; children are not for sale.”

As pro-lifers, we believe that all life has intrinsic worth and value. Slavery, whether sexual or not, strips value from human lives – it make them things to be bought and sold, used and discarded. So much of the rhetoric surrounding the choice of the mother towards the unborn child is echoed here that it surprises me that abortion is legal and slavery and sexual exploitation is a crime.

Please, as pro-lifers, consider that we cry to “protect, celebrate, and defend the sanctity of human life from conception to natural death”.  Consider the lack of dignity and protection of the slave and the sex worker. Consider widening your perception of pro-life to want dignity and value for each of the 27 million people trapped in this multi-billion dollar business.

A Shame and a Sham

by Marissa Poisson

A couple of weeks ago, I was walking home from the March for Life with my little sister in my arms and my cousin by my side. A group of people had been walking in front of us since we left Parliament Hill, and we were about to pass them on the sidewalk. One young woman, who must have been about my age, looked at us and said, “Shame on you.” Caught off guard, I offered a faint smile and we kept walking.

A few days later, a part of Bank St. was closed due to an accident. I saw a person on a stretcher being taken to an ambulance, and I hoped he or she would be okay. Then I remembered that a few blocks up the street, a short walk from Parliament Hill, there was another life-and-death situation occurring. I wished I could tell the paramedics that the next place they needed to go that Wednesday morning was the local Morgentaler Clinic because there were lives to be saved and people to be healed there. The real shame is that while we would never say that helping someone who is lying injured on the street is none of our business, not enough people want to think of the women and unborn children who find themselves on the threshold of abortion facilities.

If I could talk to the woman who said those three words to us on the street, I would ask what motivates her support for abortion and challenge her to inform herself about what an abortion does to the two people who are subjected to it. For a wealth of factual information, I would recommend Signal Hill to her.   For a look into the minds of passionate and compassionate pro-life individuals, I would point her to ProWomanProLife and, of course, this blog. I think that if she decided to seek the truth at the heart of the matter, she’d see abortion exposed for what it really is: a sham. Drop one letter from “shame” and you’ve got an apt descriptor of death and pain coated in words like choice, freedom and reproductive rights. It is high time we move toward love, support and intellectual honesty.

S.L.E.D. Part 4: Degree of Dependency

by Garnet

Time for the final installment in the S.L.E.D. Series.  I’ve dealt with the first three common pro-choice arguments, all attempts to dehumanize unborn children based on either size, level of development or environment, and so make abortion excusable.

The last argument has to do with the degree that the fetus is dependent on his/her mother.  Some people say that since the fetus is so dependent on his/her mother to survive, and would not survive on his/her own, the mother has no obligation to keep the fetus alive, and thus may abort it.  The fetus, they say, cannot survive on its own, so it must not have a right to life, since it can only survive as part of the mother.

This argument breaks down in a number of ways.  Unborn children are not the only human beings dependent on another for survival.  A newborn cannot survive without a caregiver.  A diabetic cannot survive without insulin.  A person with a heart condition cannot survive without a pacemaker.  Does this dependency make them less of a person?  Of course not.  Dependency is not a criterion for determining the value of life for born individuals, and it should not be applied to the unborn.

An embryo is very dependent on its mother at the beginning of pregnancy, and gets less dependent as the 40 weeks go by until it is ready to leave the comfort and warmth of the womb and face the cold, harsh reality of this world. The umbilical cord can be cut, but does this end the baby’s dependency on Mother?  No.  From what I understand, a mother’s responsibilities toward that baby grow exponentially after the baby is born.

In addition, humans continue to become less dependent on others as they get older.  Toddlers are less dependent than babies; teenagers are (read: are supposed to be) less dependent on parents than toddlers; adults are less dependent than teenagers.  So the trend of a lessened dependency begins in the womb and continues throughout life long after birth.  Birth, actually, is quite an arbitrary point to say that babies are sufficiently independent to be given rights as persons.  Often at the end of life, elderly people become more and more dependent on others, but this does not take away their right to life.

Essentially the argument to say the unborn have no right to life because of its dependency is age discrimination, and should not be tolerated.