Debating the debate: offering a pro- life perspective
Motion M- 312, a motion to study the 400year- old law that states a child becomes a human being “when it has completely proceeded, in a living state, from the body of its mother”, was recently defeated in Parliament. One could conclude that the defeat of this motion was a devastating blow to the pro- life movement. However, the debate about the debate, which has taken place over the past few months, has actually bolstered pro- life support and filled the movement with optimism.
There are a number of reasons for this optimism. First and foremost, advances in medical science and technology are making it difficult, if not impossible, to continue to deny the humanity of the unborn child. That is the reason why so many fought so hard to defeat this motion. If the debate had taken place, and parliamentarians had studied the evidence regarding life in the womb, they would have had to conclude that the unborn child is indeed a ‘ human being’ and that the age- old law needs to be updated. Recent polls indicate that the majority of people want some limits on abortion, another reason for optimism.
More than half the Conservative caucus voted in favour of M- 312, including several cabinet ministers, who voted against the expressed wishes of their party leader. The minister responsible for the status of women voted in favour of the motion. The backlash against her by pro- choice leaders makes one question their ideology. If women should have the right to choose, why attack Rona Ambrose for her choice? The groundswell of support for Ambrose from pro- life women across Canada points out a seldom- acknowledged fact the minister responsible for the status of women represents all Canadian women, not just those who call themselves ‘ pro- choice’. We are grateful that two P. E. I. members of Parliament, Lawrence MacAulay and Gail Shea, voted in favour of the motion.
The day following the vote on Motion 312, Langley MP Mark Warawa introduced the following motion in the House of Commons:
M- 408 “That the House condemn discrimination against females occurring through sex- selective pregnancy termination.”
According to Warawa, “Gender selection has been strongly condemned by all national political parties. As well, the Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada have vehemently opposed sex- selection pregnancy termination.”
Motion M- 312 may have been defeated, but the debate about the debate continues. Mike Schouten, campaign director of WeNeedaLaw.ca explains the reason for prolife optimism at this time in history.
“I’ve never felt more optimistic about achieving legal protection for children in the womb. For the past nine months Canadians and Parliamentarians have engaged in conversation surrounding the status of pre- born girls and boys.” He then quotes Sir Winston Churchill, who once said, “This is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.”