|
To
revoke Henry Morgentaler's Order of Canada
RATIONALE:
by
Giuseppe Gori
Bestowing
the Order of Canada on Henry Morgentaler was not a
political move. Morgentaler, during his life, has acted
mostly for personal gain. It is not even a scientific,
medical or literary appointment, as he did not achieve
success by any of the standards used to award a person
with the Order of Canada.
His
appointment to the Order of Canada is a sell-out of the
nation and its principles to a group of radical
feminists.
Canada
used to be a decent, moral, Christian-based country. The Governor
General of Canada is now declaring that Canada does not
respect human life and that Canada is a
humanist country by honoring with the Order of Canada
the president of the Humanist
Association of Canada, abortionist Henry Morgentaler. He
is a man with a complete disregard
for human life, disregard for the law of the Land and
disregard for women (over 50% of the thousands of lives
he terminated would have grown to be women), a man convicted and
imprisoned for performing illegal abortions, charged
for procuring illegal miscarriages, who had his medical
license suspended for a year and a man with an estimated
gross annual income from the business of abortion of
over $10 Million a year.
With
this award, the Governor General of Canada states that
the primary role of the government of Canada, which she
represents, is NOT to defend the life of its citizens,
but to exterminate them, if and when they are
"unwanted".
By
honouring the doctor, the state is also honouring
abortion itself
Canada
now, represented by the highest post on the Land (The
Governor General) has stopped being a decent, civilized
country where people are treated with respect.
In today's Canada "honour" is terminating
human lives on demand, for money.
In today's Canada "Honour" is wiping out a
generation of defenseless children for being "unwanted".
In
today's Canada the Order of Canada can be bestowed to a
man against the will of 92% of Canadians (recent online poll by the Globe
and Mail, with over 300,000 respondents).
We,
the people, petition the Governor General of Canada to
revoke this award immediately, for the sake of the many
who have lost their lives to protect someone else's
life. For the sake of the many who have been slaughtered
by the hand of abortionist Henry Morgentaler.
To
sign the petition, please Click on:
http://www.petitiononline.com/fcp80702/petition.html
LATEST
NEWS
Canadian
Judicial Council Tosses Complaint
by
Steven Ertelt
Sept. 25, 2008
Ottawa,
Canada (LifeNews.com) --
The Canadian Judicial Council dismissed a complaint
that pro-life advocates filed in response to abortion
practitioner Henry Morgentaler getting the Order of
Canada award. The complaint centered on Canada Supreme
Court Justice Beverley McLachlin, who had defended
her role in overseeing the award.
Charles
McVety, president of the Canadian Family Action
Coalition, and dozens of groups crafted a letter
calling for her removal.
McVety
said the chief justice should no longer sit on the
Order of Canada panel because some award recipients,
like Morgentaler, are involved in legal disputes that
will eventually come before the court.
A
collection of 42 pro-life groups and businesses signed
a joint letter to the Canadian Judicial Council, the
agency responsible for overseeing the conduct of
federal judges, asking for McLachlin's dismissal.
But
the Council tossed out the complaint on Thursday
saying it was "not a judicial matter.”
The
Toronto Globe and Mail indicated the complaint was
dismissed early in the review process in which a
member of the CJC Judicial Conduct Committee reviews
it. When the complaint is found to be substantive
enough, it moves into the second phase, but that
didn't happen in this case.
Manitoba
Chief Justice Richard Scott reviewed the complaint,
the newspaper indicated, and since it involved a
member of the CJC and outside attorney Thomas G.
Heintzman, of the law firm McCarthy Tétrault,
reviewed the decision.
McVety
told the newspaper that he's not pleased with the
decision.
“If
Canadians cannot count on non-political,
non-ideological justice from the Supreme Court of
Canada, it compromises the whole justice system,” he
said.
At
the end of July, KLRVU
surveyed Canadians and learned that a clear
majority oppose giving Morgentaler the award.
The
poll included 13,324 respondents when the firm
conducted it from July 17-21.
The
random telephone poll of Canadian households found
55.8% of Canadians oppose the awarding of the medal to
the man who helped usher in unlimited abortions in
Canada paid for at taxpayer expense.
The
poll found opposition to the award across the
provinces.
Beginning
with a wave on the east coast of Newfoundland, ebbing
slightly in Quebec and then continuing with a surge in
Ontario right to the west coast -- the tide of opinion
against awarding Morgentaler has risen, dramatically.
PEOPLE
RESPONSIBLE:
- Her Excellency Michaelle
Jean, Governor General of Canada.
-
Rt. Hon. Beverley McLachlin,
P.C., Chief Justice of Canada, Tel.: 613-992-6940
Chair of the Order of Canada Council.
-
Dr. Kevin Lynch, Clerk of the Privy Council,
Tel.: 613-957-5400.
-
Ms. Judith LaRocque, Deputy Minister of Canadian
Heritage, Tel.: 819-994-1132.
-
Ms. Karen Kain, C.C., Chair, Canada Council for
the Arts, Tel.: 1-800-263-5588
-
Dr. Yvan Guindon, C.M., President, Royal Society
of Canada, Tel.: 613-991-6990
Prof. Yvan Guindon, c.m., Directeur, Laboratoire
de chimie bio-organique,
Téléphone: 514-987-5785
-
Mr. Thomas Traves, Ph.D., Chair, Board of
Directors,
Ass'n of Universities and Colleges of Canada,
Tel.: 613-563-1236
Mr. Thomas Traves, Ph.D., President and Vice
Chancellor, Dalhousie University,
Tel.: 902-494-2511
-
Ms. Sheila-Marie Cook, Secretary to the Governor
General, Rideau Hall,
Tel.: 613-993-8200; Toll-free:
1-800-465-6890; Fax: 613-998-8760;
email: info@gg.ca
-
Ms. Emmanuelle Sajous, Deputy Secretary, Order of
Canada Chancellery,
Tel.: 613-998-8731
THE
AWARD:
On
July 1st, 2008 the Governor General of Canada bestowed
the highest Canadian honour to Henry Morgentaler.
Such
move had been tried in 2007 and generated a flurry of
protests. In 2008 the nomination was kept secret until
the last few days.
The
July 1st announcement of the award came despite the fact
that Canada's best known abortionist was not on the list
for this year. The announcement took many by surprise
both by bypassing normal procedures for the award, and
the controversy that has always followed the recipient.
Protesters in Ottawa, on July 9, 2008, asking
to Revoke Morgentaler's award:
|
 |
THE
MAN:
| Henry
Morgentaler, CM, (born March 19, 1923, in
Łódź , Poland) is a Canadian
physician who performs abortions
Upon
graduation Morgentaler refused to go to Israel
because he strongly opposed Zionism. He and his
wife, Chava Rosenfarb, left Europe in 1950 to
travel to Canada where he practised medicine in
Montreal. He worked there as a general
practitioner for nearly twenty years before his
convictions about abortion caused serious
conflict with others. On October 19, 1967, he
gave public testimony before a Government of
Canada committee about his belief that any
pregnant woman should have the right to a safe
abortion. |
Morgentaler
(right), with NDP Leader Jack Layton in August
2005
|
| In
1969 Morgentaler gave up his family practice and
began openly performing illegal abortions; at
the time, abortion was only legal when performed
in an hospital after approbation of a
Therapeutic Abortion Committee.
On
June 1, 1970, Morgentaler was arrested in
Montreal for performing illegal abortions. In
1972 he ran in the Federal Election in the
riding of Saint-Denis as an independent,
finishing fourth with 1,509 votes. Later in 1973
he claimed to have performed 5,000 illegal
abortions. He was acquitted by a jury in the
court case, but the acquittal was overturned by
five judges on the Quebec Court of Appeal in
1974. He went to prison, appealed, and was again
acquitted. Morgentaler first went to the Supreme
Court of Canada in an attempt to overturn the
country's abortion law in Morgentaler v. The
Queen but was unsuccessful.
In
1973, on the basis of Morgentaler's public
claims that he had performed thousands of
abortions, the Quebec Ministry of Revenue
ordered him to pay $354,799 in unpaid income
taxes. An out-of court settlement reached a
few years later resulted in Morgentaler paying
$101,000 instead.
The
Montreal Gazette reported in 1974 that
according to police evidence, Morgentaler was
re-using disposable vacurettes, against the
manufacturer's instructions which stated
that they "cannot be re-used". The
Gazette reported that when contacted,
Morgentaler stated that earlier model Vacurettes
"could occasionally be used more than
once", but he insisted that "whether
someone uses a Vacurette once or twice has
nothing to do with practicing good
medicine." A 1991 Alberta Report
article reports that he now denied having
re-used vacurettes, but it also reported that
according to The Gazette's lawyers,
Morgentaler never took any legal action against
that paper.
In
1976, the Disciplinary Committee of the
Professional Corporation of Physicians of Quebec
suspended Morgentaler's medical license for a
year as a result of his conviction for having
performed an illegal abortion. According to
Catherine Dunphy's 1996 biography of Morgentaler,
the committee "commented on 'an attitude
which is primarily directed to protecting his
fees. No really valid interview is held before
proceeding with the abortion. This behaviour
confers a mercenary character on the
doctor-patient relationship. This committee is
incapable of reconciling this behaviour with the
humanitarian concern that the accused invoked
throughout his defence.' "
In
1982, the Canadian Charter of Rights and
Freedoms was enacted as part of the Canadian
Constitution, including the right to Life.
Morgentaler was charged again in 1983 in Ontario
for procuring illegal miscarriages. He was
acquitted by a jury, but the verdict was
reversed by the Ontario Court of Appeal. The
case was then sent to the Supreme Court of
Canada. He was acquitted once again, and the
Canadian Supreme Court declared the law he was
convicted under to be in violation of the
Charter and thus unconstitutional in the case of
Morgentaler et al. v. Her Majesty The Queen
1988 (1 S.C.R. 30). This ruling essentially
ended all statutory restrictions on abortion in
Canada.
Morgentaler
was the first president of the Humanist
Association of Canada from 1968 to 1999. He
remains the organization's honorary president.
On a number of occasions, he appeared opposite
Christian theologians or evangelists on campus
to debate the existence of God.
Morgentaler
is currently working to open two private
abortion clinics in the Canadian Arctic, so that
women who live there do not have to travel vast
distances to obtain abortions.
Morgentaler
has an estimated gross annual revenue of $11
million from his abortion clinics, according to
research published in the Ottawa newspaper Le
Droit on Saturday, October 26, 2002. |
HOW
REVEALING:
The
Humanist Morgentaler, and his indifference to human
life, can be better understood after reading the
following piece from Lee Duigon, on the relation
between man and the rest of nature according to
humanists:
"Those
who say there is no difference are invariably
atheists, and that explains their whole position.
Indeed, it’s logical. If there is no God, then God
did not create man in His image; and if He didn’t,
then there can be no special distinction between man
and other living things. Do away with God, and you do
away with man.
No
one is more anti-human than a humanist. Their
purpose in dethroning God, they believe, is to elevate
man. But in their attempt to raise man up, they only
bring him down, reducing him to worms’ meat on the
hoof—no Savior, no Redeemer, no immortal soul to
save or redeem. Just another animal.
Out
of one side of their mouths, they say man is no better
than a mosquito. Out of the other, they demand the
creation of a messianic state that will abolish
poverty, war, disease, inequality, bullying, and
burgers cooked with trans-fat. A world government
would suit them best: see The Humanist Manifesto II.
But
why go to all that trouble for just another animal?
You don’t see elites among the aphids promising an
earthly paradise for all aphids, if only they’re
given the power to impose it.
Once
you disavow God, you disavow the possibility of ever
locating any transcendent, absolute moral authority,
anywhere. There simply is none. We are left with only
two sources for authority—“nature,” whatever
that is, and the state."
IN
CASE YOU DO NOT KNOW:
-
More than 100,000 abortions per year are performed in
Canada. Over 40,000 per year in Ontario alone.
-
Abortionists are not prosecuted in Canada for
performing abortions at any time during pregnancy.
Late term abortions, including partial birth
abortions, are not common, but they are still
performed (as a consequence of the Supreme Court 1988
decision and the unwillingness of federal Legislators
to introduce a law protecting unborn children or
regulating abortions).
-
In Ontario abortions are financed by you, the taxpayer
(an Ontario Government decision).
ORDER
OF CANADA ADMINISTRATION:
REASONS
FOR TERMINATION
Taken
from the website: Chancellery of the Order of Canada:
Policy and Procedure for Termination of Appointment to
the Order Of Canada
Policy
1. Paragraph 25(c) of the Constitution of the Order of
Canada provides for
termination of a person's appointment to the Order by an
ordinance made by
the Governor General.
2. Termination of a person's appointment to the Order of
Canada shall be
on the recommendation of the Advisory Council made to
the Governor General.
The recommendation of the Advisory Council shall be
based on evidence and
guided by the principle of fairness and shall only be
made after the Council
has ascertained the relevant facts relating to the case
under consideration.
3. The Advisory Council shall consider the termination
of a person's
appointment to the Order of Canada if
(a) the person has been convicted of a criminal
offence; or
(b) the conduct of the person
(i) constitutes a significant departure from
generally-recognized standards
of public behaviour which is seen to undermine the
credibility, integrity or
relevance of the Order, or detracts from the original
grounds upon which the
appointment was based; or
(ii) has been subject to official sanction, such as a
fine or a reprimand,
by an adjudicating body, professional association or
other organization.
4. Termination of an appointment to the Order of Canada
is the sole
sanction for a person appointed to the Order.
(From
government web site)
(See
MEDIA RELEASE below)
TERMINATION:
TERMINATION
OF MEMBERSHIP IN THE ORDER
25. A person's membership in the Order ceases when
(a) the person dies;
(b) the Governor General accepts the person's
resignation from the Order, which resignation shall have
been made in writing and given to the Secretary General;
or
(c) the Governor General makes an Ordinance
terminating the person's
appointment to the Order.
ORDINANCES
26. The Governor General may make Ordinances
respecting the government and insignia of the Order and
the termination of a person's appointment to the Order.
ADMINISTRATION:
.
. .
3.
The Governor General of Canada shall be the Chancellor
and Principal
Companion of the Order, and the Governor General's
spouse shall be a
Companion.
4. The Chancellor is responsible for the administration
of the Order.
5. The Secretary to the Governor General shall be the
Secretary General of
the Order, and shall be responsible for
(a) maintaining the records of the Order and of the
Council;
COUNCIL
7. (1) The Advisory Council for the Order shall consist
of the following
members:
(a) the Chief Justice of Canada, who shall act as
Chairperson of the
Council;
(b) the Clerk of the Privy Council;
(c) the Deputy Minister of the Department of Canadian
Heritage;
(d) the Chairperson of the Canada Council;
(e) the President of the Royal Society of Canada;
(f) the Chairperson of the Board of Directors of the
Association of
Universities and Colleges of Canada; and
(g) not more than five additional members appointed
pursuant to subsection
(2).
(2) The Governor General may, on the recommendation of
the members of the
Council referred to in paragraphs (1) (a) to (f),
appoint five persons
belonging to the Order as members of the Council for a
three-year term.
8. The Council shall
(a) consider those nominations referred to in paragraph
5 (c) that the
Secretary General has transmitted to it;
(b) compile and submit to the Governor General a list of
those nominees in
the categories of Companion, Officer and Member and
honorary Companion,
Officer and Member who have the greatest merit; and
(c) advise the Governor General on such matters as the
Governor General may
refer to the Council.
...
MEMBERS
18. Appointments of persons as Members and honorary
Members shall be made
for distinguished service in or to a particular
community, group or field of
activity.
19. The Governor General may appoint as Members, other
than honorary
Members, a maximum of one hundred and thirty-six persons
in any year.
PREVIOUS
CASES WHEN THE AWARD HAS BEEN TERMINATED:
In
1998, Alan Eagleson, a former head of the NHL Players
Association, lost his Order of Canada after a conviction
for defrauding players he represented.
In
2005, former Assembly of First Nations chief David
Ahenakew had his honour terminated after a Saskatoon
court found him guilty of promoting hatred with
anti-Semitic remarks.
[The decision was overturned by the Saskatchewan Court
of Queen's Bench on the grounds that the trial judge
failed to properly take into consideration that the
remarks were uttered in the midst of an angry
confrontation with a reporter, and therefore may not
have constituted a "willful" promotion of
hatred. A new trial was ordered.] http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/orderofcanada/
SELECTED
REACTIONS TO THE AWARD:
M
E D I A R E L E A S E
(REAL WOMEN OF CANADA)
CHIEF JUSTICE BEVERLEY MCLACHLIN HAS
BETRAYED BOTH HERSELF AND HER COURT
Ottawa, Ontario,
August 14, 2008
REAL Women of Canada is one of the 41 signatories of the
letter of complaint, dated August 13, 2008, laid with the Canadian Judicial Council against Chief
Justice Beverley McLachlin.
The complaint is based on the actions of the Chief
Justice while serving as Chairperson of the Advisory Council of the Order of Canada.
In carrying out her responsibilities, Chief Justice
McLachlin, contrary to established precedent, overruled the decisions of previous councils to
reject Henry Morgentaler for the Order of Canada.
Moreover, decisions to appoint to the Order of Canada have previously been based on the consensus
of Council members, but, in this particular case, there was no consensus. In making Morgentaler a
member of the Order of Canada, the Chief Justice also ignored the fact that Morgentaler was
reprimanded in 1976 and had his medical license temporarily removed for unprofessional conduct by
the Disciplinary Committee of the Professional Corporation of Physicians of Quebec. To appoint to
the Order of Canada a nominee reprimanded by his professional association is in violation of section
3(b)(i) of the Constitution of the Order of Canada.
Chief Justice McLachlin knew, or should have known, that
her actions as Chairperson of the Advisory Council would compromise the integrity of the judiciary,
since legal actions dealing with Morgentaler have in the past, and will again, in the near future, be
brought before the Supreme Court. Since the Chief Justice has designated Morgentaler as worthy of
distinction, her impartiality and integrity in these legal matters have now been severely compromised.
Chief Justice McLachlin had the duty to uphold the
accepted standards of judicial conduct, of impartiality and fairness. She failed to do so.
Confidence in her and her court has now been seriously undermined. As a result, the Judicial
Council should recommend the removal of Madam Justice McLachlin from the Supreme Court of Canada.
This complaint is laid in the full knowledge that Chief
Justice McLachlin also serves as the Chairperson of the Canadian Judicial Council. Her obvious conflict
of interest in this complaint also requires that she immediately step down from her role as Chairperson
of the Canadian Judicial Council.
Cardinal
Turcotte Returns Order of Canada
September
11, 2008
"On
May 9th 1996, the office of the Governor-General of
the time, Mr. Roméo Leblanc, announced that I had
been named to the Order of Canada. I had accepted
this honour on behalf of all those who, because of
their faith in Jesus Christ, work in the social
domain to serve the most disadvantaged of our
society.
"I have the greatest respect for the Order of
Canada. It is meant to recognize the contribution of
persons who help to bring about the progress of our
society and who are concerned about the future of
our world. Until recently, I sincerely believed that
the Order of Canada was bestowed upon persons about
whom there was a consensus.
"I was away when the Governor-General, Madame
Michaelle Jean, announced the nomination of Dr.
Henry Morgentaler to the Order of Canada. This
announcement generated a great deal of criticism on
the part of those who do not share Dr. Morgentaler's
views regarding the respect for human life.
"I must admit that I had hoped that, in light
of the large number of protests, the Consultative
Council for the Order of Canada would revise its
decision. Because it has not done so up to now and
because silence on my part might be misinterpreted,
I feel obliged in conscience to reaffirm my
convictions regarding the respect for human life,
from conception to death. We are not the masters of
human life; it rests in the hands of God.
"As a result, I wish to declare that I am
renouncing the title of Officer of the Order of
Canada, bestowed upon me in 1996, and that I am
returning the insignia that was given to me."
Cardinal
Turcotte, Archbishop of Montréal
Ottawa
(LifeNews.com) --
Canada Supreme Court Justice Beverley McLachlin is
defending her role in overseeing the Order of Canada
award given to abortion practitioner Henry
Morgentaler. McLachlin, who is the head of the
advisory council that selects the award recipients
said she normally doesn't vote.
McLachlin
told the Toronto Star she intentionally abstained in
the case of Morgentaler's award and did so
purposefully.
She
told the newspaper, "contrary to what has been
reported," the chairman of the committee
doesn't direct the debate over an award or lead the
decision to choose a particular recipient.
She
said her primary role as chairman of the council is
to ensure that the discussion of potential award
recipients is fair and accurate "not to weigh
in for, or against, any particular candidate."
"There
has been a lot of misinformation on this
issue," she said. "Some idea was put out
by I don't know who - a rumor or some source - that
the chair leads the discussion. That is just not the
case."
McLachlin
says she is required to chair the Order of Canada
advisory committee by virtue of her position as
chief justice of the Supreme Court.
Charles
McVety, president of the Canadian Family Action
Coalition, and one of the dozens of groups to craft
a letter seeking McLachlin's dismissal from the
court for her involvement, responded to her remarks.
"If
Canadians cannot count on non-political,
non-ideological justice from the Supreme Court of
Canada, it compromises the whole justice
system," he told the Globe and Mail.
McVety
told that newspaper that he was surprised to hear of
reports of her involvement in the award.
"We
never accused her of voting. We accused her of
disregarding the constitution that she is bound to
serve. By expressing her approval of the process,
she is expressing approval of Morgentaler's activism
on abortion," he said.
McVety
said the chief justice should no longer sit on the
Order of Canada panel because some award recipients,
like Morgentaler, are involved in legal disputes
that will eventually come before the court.
As
LifeNews.com reported previously, a collection of 42
pro-life groups and businesses signed a joint letter
to the Canadian Judicial Council, the agency
responsible for overseeing the conduct of federal
judges.
"In
order to preserve the integrity of Canada's judicial
system, we respectfully ask that you consider this
complaint seriously, investigate Beverley
McLachlin's inappropriate behavior and recommend to
Parliament that (she) be removed from office,"
the August 12 letter said.
"The
behavior of (McLachlin) outside the courtroom on the
(Order of Canada) advisory council has reduced
respect for both her and the Canadian
judiciary," it added.
Jeff
Ward, a spokesman for the Canadian Judicial Council,
told the news service that it will take the
complaint seriously.
"Any
complaint that comes in, even if it is frivolous,
does get processed and responded to," he said.
However,
in an irony that isn't lost on pro-life advocates,
Judge McLachlin chairs the judicial council as well.
Brian
Rushfeldt, executive director of the Calgary-based
Canada Family Action Coalition, talked with CanWest
about the letter and McLachlin. He worries she will
not be able to be partial if a Morgentaler lawsuit
to force New Brunswick taxpayers to fund abortions
reaches the Supreme Court.
"What
if the New Brunswick decision gets appealed to the
Supreme Court? I see no way she can hear this case
and claim she is going to be independent, fair, and
neutral," he said.
At
the end of July, KLRVU surveyed Canadians and
learned that a clear majority oppose giving
Morgentaler the award.
The
poll included 13,324 respondents when the firm
conducted it from July 17-21.
The
random telephone poll of Canadian households found
55.8% of Canadians oppose the awarding of the medal
to the man who helped ushered in unlimited abortions
in Canada paid for at taxpayer expense.
The
poll found opposition to the award across the
provinces.
Beginning
with a wave on the east coast of Newfoundland,
ebbing slightly in Quebec and then continuing with a
surge in Ontario right to the west coast -- the tide
of opinion against awarding Morgentaler has risen,
dramatically.
Cabinet
Minister MP Jason Kenney
"Those
members of the council who made this deliberately contentious choice were more interested in using the
Order as a vehicle for their own political views on a contentious issue rather than as a unifying symbol
of great achievements which is what the Order was created for."
"There
is a provision in the Order which requires the Council to consider rescinding the Order from
individuals who after their appointments end up with criminal records or reprimands from their
professions. When the constitution of the order was crafted, they didn't even bother to make
that apply to prospective nominees because it was at the time probably unthinkable that they would
seriously consider a nomination for someone with such a background as this."
Kenney
also addressed the "undenied" reports that the Supreme Court Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin,
the chair of the council which decides who receives the award, railroaded the award to Morgentaler, dispensing
with the need for consensus on the committee and permitting a rare recorded vote. The Globe and
Mail reports today that the panel was divided 7-2, with the two government members having cast the
opposing votes.
"I
am concerned by the undenied reports that the council departed from its usual consensus rule in
this instance," said Kenney. "If that's true it's very troublesome because it seems to me
that the consensus rule exists precisely to avoid divisive and disruptive decisions. If
anyone on this council made a power play to override the usual consensus rule that would be very
regrettable indeed."
Suzanne Fortin (Ottawa FCP Regional Director and blogger)
The
news of Henry Morgentaler's reception of the Order
of Canada has outraged many. However, this situation
has had a silver lining: it has re-ignited the abortion
debate.
A massive telephone poll was launched <KLRVU
polling, July 17-21, 2008> to get the pulse of
Canadians on the Morgentaler issue. There were over
13 000 respondents.
It turns out that 56% of Canadians are opposed to
his receiving the Order of Canada.
This contradicts the last Angus-Reid poll that
showed a majority of Canadians in favour.
With a poll this large, there is no doubt as to
where public opinion stands.
Lee Middleton,
Orillia Packet & Times
July
17, 2008
As
you are undoubtedly aware, all but two of our
federal Supreme Court judges have deliberately cast
aside four rules governing who will receive the
Order of Canada so that it could be given to a man
with a criminal record.
Though
it would seem they regard themselves as gods, they
are not; and there should be a means of holding them
accountable when they unashamedly climb beyond the
pinnacle of their mandate.
No
public servant should have absolute power such as
these judges, who are accountable to no one but
themselves. Under such circumstances, the temptation
to manipulate law is huge, as their decision in this
case clearly shows: they have put aside objectivity
in favour of personal agenda.
This
breach of trust bears all the earmarks of a despotic
legal system: it is an open sore on the face of
democracy.
I've
heard that the "queen" of the Supreme
Court of Canada has declared (in writing) that the
power of these judges is ever broadening. It appears
she means to see the courts writing law when their
clear mandate is only to interpret it.
They
seem intent to usurp the constitutional right of our
elected Parliament to make law, in the belief that
no one can stop them. God forbid we should allow
them to wrestle this considerable power from our
elected officials, who can be arraigned for
inflicting bad law on the public they serve.
Leaving
aside the fact that Dr. Henry Morgentaler is,
according to the holy Bible, guilty before God for
his murderous undertakings and should never have
received this award, we should be outraged that
rules were broken that it be accomplished.
Pro-abortion
judges broke the rules that their man (an
abortionist, who did time for crimes against the
state) would be elevated to iconic status.
A
vote for anyone who supports the Order of Canada for
such a man as Morgentaler (especially under the
obviously contrived conveyance of this case) is a
vote in favour of moral decay, even anarchy.
For
thousands of years, the human race at large has
regarded abortion as an immoral and self-degrading
practice; only in the last century has mankind (with
women pushing for it) managed to force it on society
by appointing the appropriate judges.
Pierre Lemieux, Member
of Parliament for Glengarry-Prescott-Russell
“I
am appalled and in complete disagreement with the
announcement that Canada’s highest civilian honour,
the Order of Canada, is to be granted to Henry
Morgentaler.
The
Order of Canada is a prestigious distinction
bestowed upon those individuals who are universally
accepted and recognized as making a valuable and
positive contribution to our great nation.
Henry
Morgentaler has made neither a valuable nor a
positive contribution to Canada. I would argue that this
highly controversial figure has done more to foster
division amongst Canadians than any other person in
living memory.
In
addition, he has most certainly weakened Canada
by robbing our nation of its true potential -
through the death of thousands of unborn Canadian
children. It is no wonder that so many Canadians
across the country are outraged.
I
encourage all Canadians opposed to the awarding of
the Order of Canada to Henry Morgentaler to contact
both the Governor General Michaëlle Jean and Chief
Justice Beverley McLachlin (Chairperson of the
Advisory Council of the Order of Canada) to voice
their objections and to demand that this decision be
reversed.”
Priest
returning Order of Canada over Morgentaler
| A
British Columbia priest who worked extensively
with troubled teenagers in Saskatchewan is
returning his Order of Canada after learning
that abortion crusader Dr. Henry Morgentaler has
been awarded the same honour.
Rev.
Lucien Larré said he means no disrespect to the
Governor General, but said he must return the
Order of Canada because Morgentaler's
appointment degrades the award for those who
believe in the sanctity of life.
"I
feel in my conscience that Dr. Morgentaler was
not appropriate because there are too many
people in Canada who are against him and do not
see him as a model or an inspiration," Larré
said Thursday. |
|
Gov.
Gen. Michaëlle Jean named Morgentaler as a member
of the order on Tuesday for his services to women
and for leadership in the fields of humanism and
civil liberties. The appointment was made on the
advice of the Order of Canada selection committee.
Larré,
who lives in the Vancouver-area city of Coquitlam,
said he isn't acting as a representative of the
Archdiocese of Vancouver in his rejection of the
Order of Canada, but as a private citizen struggling
with a matter of conscience.
"Sometimes,
life is difficult, and a person has to make
decisions according to their conscience and you have
to draw a line in the sand, and I did that," he
said.
Former Lieutenant
Governor of New Brunswick returns Order of Canada
Former
Lieutenant Governor of New Brunswick Gilbert Finn
is the latest person to return their Order of Canada
medals.
Others returning the
Order of Canada
The
Leader-Post has published a letter written by a
nephew of Order of Canada recipient Monsignor A.J.
Goski, confirming he is returning his uncle's
award. Goski received the honour for his dedication
to finding homes and jobs for struggling men and
women, especially those who had immigrated to Canada
from Europe.
Several
others have retuned their award, such as those of Madonna
House foundress Catherine Doherty.
Others
(at least three more) have decided to return the
Order of Canada award anonymously, due Dr. Henry
Morgentaler's appointment.
Morgentaler’s
Order of Canada – Who is responsible?
by David Hogg
As
the Toronto Star reported on July 3: “Prime
Minister Stephen Harper has criticized the decision
to award the Order of Canada to pro-choice crusader
Dr. Henry Morgentaler because of its potential to
sow dissension among Canadians.”
Inherently,
the Prime Minister’s criticism reflects on those
responsible for the award. So who were they? The
Constitution of the Chancellery of the Order of
Canada lays it all out. The Chief Justice of the
Supreme Court of Canada is Chair of the Advisory
Council, which makes the recommendations. The
Governor General, as Chancellor responsible for
administering the Order and at their pleasure, makes
the appointments.
Beverley
McLachlin, as Chair of the Advisory Council would
orchestrate the recommendations. Ms. McLachlin, with
her advanced legal background, should have ensured
this was done in accordance with the Constitution.
Her part in the award is now the subject of probing
questions.
The
Constitution requires that those who make it on to
the list of nominees “have the greatest merit”.
With that requirement, it is understandable and
expected that the votes for successful nominees
would be unanimous. It is claimed historically this
was the case. It is pretty much common sense that if
a nominee cannot get a unanimous vote in their
favour, they are not the “greatest”?
Mary
Vallis writing in the National Post July 2 put an
interesting slant on that expectation: “The
advisory council's recommendations do not have to be
unanimous, but members do use a "democratic
process" in reviewing nominations and making
their selections, a spokeswoman for Rideau Hall said
yesterday.” That the members of the Advisory
Council use a democratic process is reassuring.
Democratic processes are open and can be
scrutinized. We will be able to obtain access to the
records of the proceedings and examine what actually
happened.
We
will be able to find out who proposed
Morgentaler’s name and how the vote went. Already
there has been a suggestion of a 7 – 2 vote.
Though given this disagreement within the Advisory
Council, why did the nomination proceed?
There
have been concerns that Chief Justice McLachlin may
have influenced the process. In December, 2005, on
the other side of the world, she gave a rather
worrisome lecture. Her Lord Cooke Lecture in
Wellington, New Zealand opened with the gush: “A
few years ago, a new subject emerged on the hot list
of legal academe – unwritten constitutional
principles.” The implications of these
“unwritten” principles became quickly obvious.
Her lecture went on, “But what gives the judges
the right to set forth constitutional principles
capable of invalidating laws and executive acts,
when Parliament has not seen fit to set these
principles out in writing in the nation’s
constitution?” The inference of McLachlin’s view
of legal matters is quite frightening: judges know
what these “unwritten constitutional principles”
are and can impose them from the bench? Isn’t that
a situation for which there is already a term,
“activist judges”. Although a more accurate
designation would appear to be “imperialist
judges” – those who impose their will?
To
get a better understanding of McLachlin’s
attachment to this concept, her lecture continues:
“I will suggest that actually quite a lot is going
on, and that it is important. What is going on is
the idea that there exist fundamental norms of
justice so basic that they form part of the legal
structure of governance and must be upheld by the
courts, whether or not they find expression in
constitutional texts.” We should give acute
attention to her: “must be upheld by
the courts”.
Concerns
were expressed at the time about how MacLachlin
might use this radical concept. The concerns did not
turn into widespread outrage, which is likely what
should have happened, if only to curtail her
ambitions and apply some restraint So now we have
the lecture boldly posted on the Supreme Court of
Canada’s website. The obvious concern has been
broached and likely, to use similar terminology to
that of the Order’s Constitution, greatly merits
deeper deliberation. Were McLachlin’s “unwritten
constitutional principles” used to override the
Order of Canada’s Constitution? Only free access
to the Council records and members’ recollections
will provide some answers.
There
is another very bothersome aspect to this whole
affair. How is it, that the Chief Justice of Canada
and the Governor General did not know their actions
would ignite a fire-storm of protest? Here are two
people who should be intimately familiar with
Canadian society, should know what is likely
to be acceptable and not acceptable. And they did
not know? How can they effectively discharge their
prominent responsibilities if they are so out of
touch?
Is
there some smoke of arrogance which clouded their
judgements? Did they believe, let us hope
mistakenly, that, because of their positions of
prominence and trust, folk would take their
judgement without question?
The
fire-storm of protest is so widespread and so
pervasive, Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin and
Governor General Michaëlle
Jean must by now know they have committed an
indiscretion capable of besmirching their positions.
It will be interesting to see if they make any
public statements attempting to explain their
actions and what particular perspectives they want
to give.
How Morgentaler exposed the chasm between
elites and the rest of Canada
By
David Warren
See the full article on The Ottawa Citizen on Sunday,
July 06, 2008
.
. .
Like
many, many, many Canadians, I took the appointment
of Henry Morgentaler to membership in the Order of
Canada -- proclaimed on "Canada Day" -- as
a stick in the eye for everything we believe in. As
a gratuitous insult to the memory of three million
aborted babies.
It
was intended as that. The perpetrators of this
hateful deed -- presenting an abortionist as a model
for "humanism" and champion of women --
knew perfectly well what they were doing. As I had
learned even before the event, protocol had been
breached in making the appointment. There was no
consensus on the appointment committee; the chair,
Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin, had failed to
recuse herself. It was done deceitfully, after the
Governor General's office had assured outraged
callers last February that Morgentaler would not be
on the list this year. And last weekend, as the
rumour spread, a fresh round of outraged callers
were being mocked -- given the phone number of
Campaign Life Coalition by the Rideau Hall
switchboard.
The
announcement was then delayed -- another
irregularity -- until after the Parliament Hill
celebrations, to prevent a large pro-life
demonstration from coalescing there. And, instead of
denouncing the appointment, our cynical prime
minister had "talking points" distributed
to his caucus before the fact.
A
very dark thing was done, as such things are always
done -- in a very dark way.
Yet
I think it may be for the best, in a longer view of
things. We might often grumble that the "ruling
class" in Canada -- the smug, self-serving,
"progressive" political, legal, academic,
and media elites, including the prime example at
Rideau Hall -- belong to some other world than the
one from which they suck taxes. But seldom is there
an event so stark, that we see them as they are. The
Morgentaler award revealed that to so many
Canadians.
What
has happened to this great country? Abortion has not
liberated women, it has made them slaves, denigrated
womanhood, motherhood and human life. What a
tragedy.
Jakki
Jeffs, executive director, Alliance for Life
Ontario, Guelph, Ont.
A Symbol
Of Moral Decay, By Prof. Ian Hunter
In the old
Canada, Morgentaler was prosecuted.
In the new
Canada, he is awarded our highest honour
National
Post Published: Wednesday,
July 02, 2008
To
award the Order of Canada to Henry Morgentaler does
not much diminish Governor-General Michaelle Jean
nor Canada (neither, truth to tell, have much of a
reputation to tarnish), but it might make some past
recipients -- for example, Jean Vanier (1971), or
the Salvation Army's Arnold Brown (1982), or the
late Cardinal Emmett Carter (1983) -- seem to be in
rather uncomfortable company. But then, people
forget that the 1994 Nobel Peace Prize was awarded
to Yasser Arafat.
In
the early 1970s, when I was just beginning my law
teaching career, I was scheduled to debate Henry
Morgentaler at the law faculty at the University of
Ottawa. At the time, I was worried less about the
substance of the debate, more about procedural
niceties: Should I shake his hand? And how should I
address him? To call someone "Dr." whose
grisly practice made a daily mockery of the
Hippocratic Oath, seemed unappealing. In the event
it didn't matter; Morgentaler did not show up,
sending a replacement instead.
Today,
such niceties of address and nomenclature wouldn't
arise. The Governor-General has chosen to confer the
country's highest honour on Canada's most notorious
abortionist.
The
government so seldom does anything original. The
Order of Canada follows the decision by the
University of Western Ontario in 2006 to confer an
honorary doctorate on Morgentaler. At the time, I
wrote that this is what happens when a university
loses its way, when it no longer knows why it
exists, nor what it is supposed to do.
Well,
what does awarding Morgentaler the Order of Canada
say about Canada?
It
says that the new Canada -- the Canada of Michaelle
Jean, and Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin (who
chaired the selection committee) and the mummers who
sat on the committee are as like the old Canada as,
in Hamlet's words, "am I to Hercules." In
old Canada, Morgentaler was prosecuted and sent to
jail for performing illegal abortions. But that was
in another era and, as far as I'm concerned, another
country -- a country as dead as any of the
recipients of Morgentaler's attentions.
The
decision to give Morgentaler the Order of Canada was
scheduled to be made on Canada's birthday. It would
require macabre sarcasm to call this a
"birthday" present; so, for this "deathday"
present, let me briefly remark on three
propositions.
One,
the Canada where I was born, where I was educated
and grew to manhood, came to an end at about the
time of the Supreme Court of Canada's Morgentaler
decision (1988). I do not suggest any cause and
effect; that would be to give undue weight to one
ludicrous Supreme Court decision, one of many the
court has made since judges became infatuated with
the Charter of Rights. What I do assert is that the
Canada I am sometimes inclined fondly to remember
ended at about that time.
Back
then, I wrote articles about the Morgentaler
decision in scholarly journals, analyzing the
court's ideological motives and its flawed legal
reasoning. All a waste of time and paper. Today, I
cannot bring myself to re-read the decision or my
critiques; abortion no longer seems a subject for
scholarly analysis and debate, but rather an evil to
be fled from.
Two,
all who are touched by abortion are hurt by it. No
winners, only losers. The most obviously hurt, of
course, are the children who are not allowed to draw
breath. But the women who undergo the procedure,
their men and even the abortionist, are also hurt by
it.
Three,
while we do not forget the evil functionary,
sometimes our remembrance of him is subsumed in the
triumph of the victim. Through the centuries Pontius
Pilate has not been forgotten, but he is remembered
only in the greater drama of Jesus Christ.
So
let it be with Morgentaler. He will not be
forgotten, nor should he be, nor the evil he has
perpetrated. But the greater story --even in as
pathetic a country as Canada -- is not his, it is
Humanae Vitae (1968) and the final triumph of life
over the culture of death.
The
words of Pope Paul VI in Humanae Vitae will be
pondered by those who come after us (assuming that
there are any) when the Order of Canada has been
mercifully and deservedly forgotten.
"To
[governments] is committed the responsibility of
safeguarding the common good … Never allow the
morals of your people to be undermined … Never
tolerate those practices which are opposed to the
natural law of God."
And--might
I add--do not honour men without honour. - Ian
Hunter is Professor Emeritus in the Faculty of Law
at the University of Western Ontario.
http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/story.html?id=625590
Morgentaler
is no hero -- women who don't abort are
Naomi
Lakritz, Calgary Herald
Published: Friday, July 04, 2008
When
I think of a hero, Dr. Henry Morgentaler does not
spring to mind. "Hero" is the wrong
appellation to stick on him.
Terry
Fox, hop-skipping his way down the Trans-Canada
Highway, in that long-ago summer of 1980, is a hero.
Even the dog that barks to alert its sleeping owner
to a fire is more of a hero than Morgentaler is. You
see, heroes save and enhance lives -- they don't
destroy them. Yet, this country's most distinguished
award, the Order of Canada, has gone to a
"hero" whose sole "achievement"
is killing unborn Canadian citizens.
The
pro-choice faction, having won its appalling
campaign to politicize and devalue the Order of
Canada, is declaring Morgentaler a hero to millions.
Activist Judy Rebick said "most women" see
this as a victory. But who elected her to speak for
"most" women? I don't remember being given
a ballot.
Now
that the pro-choice forces have bullied and
manipulated their way to this shameful day, Rebick
has also proclaimed the abortion debate to be over.
Hang on to your empty victory, Judy -- those opposed
will continue to write and speak out against this
evil. We can do no less.
The
melodramatic mantle of heroism that the pro-choice
side drapes about Morgentaler's shoulders is
intolerably phoney. Heroes rescue people.
Morgentaler, who has helped make it open season on
the unborn, has rescued no one and condemned
thousands.
He
has not saved women whose lives would be jeopardized
by giving birth, for modern medicine can
successfully manage high-risk pregnancies. The
Public Health Agency of Canada reports that the
1997-2000 maternal mortality rate for Canada was 6.1
deaths for every 100,000 live births. These women
were pregnant by choice, but died from some
emergency that arose at the end; they were not
"forced" to have babies against their will
because abortion was unavailable.
Morgentaler
is not rescuing women from lives of dire poverty
into which, according to the pro-choice faction,
they will automatically descend unless their babies
are killed. Fifty-three per cent of abortions in
2004 were performed on women in their 20s. This
demographic tends to be employed. Teenage girls, who
are most likely to end up in poverty due to
pregnancy, accounted for less than 14 per cent of
abortions, according to Statistics Canada.
Pro-choicers
seem to think that giving up an unwanted baby for
adoption also plunges women into poverty. Otherwise,
why wouldn't they advocate instead for the
income-neutral option of adoption? Why the
insistence on death?
Here's
the other tiresome canard they trot out -- that
unwanted babies should be aborted because their
lives will be hell with the mothers who didn't want
them. Then, they demand to know why pro-lifers don't
step up to the plate and adopt these children.
Perhaps they should put aside the empty rhetoric and
check the facts. According to parentlinkalberta.ca,
there is a waiting list of Albertans who want to
adopt an infant and "very few healthy infants
are available." Demand has always outstripped
supply.
Morgentaler
Unworthy of Nation’s Highest Honour, by Jim
Hnatiuk,
Deputy Leader, CHP.
July 02, 2008
The
highest honour afforded a Canadian citizen has been
reduced to insignificance at the hand of our own
Governor General, Michaëlle Jean.
Traditionally,
members of the Order of Canada have been men and
women that all Canadians have been able to look up
to and esteem for their achievements in their fields
of endeavour or for some act of bravery. Now, that
honour has been sullied by appointing a man who is
notorious for nothing more than his callous
disregard for human life, and the brutal death and
dismemberment of the weakest members of our society.
Proponents
will argue that Mr. Morgentaler (I cannot call him
Doctor) has achieved great things for women, namely
their right to “choose” whether to have a child
or not; that this right has levelled the playing
field of the sexes; women are now free to pursue
their sexuality with the same abandon as men,
unencumbered by the results of their dalliances;
true sexual equality has been achieved.
Since
when did this become the highest goal? How did this
displace, “Thou shalt not murder” in our
society? How can we as a nation esteem license above
responsibility, and encourage our mothers to become
cold blooded murders?
In
the 18th and 19th centuries
people fought and won the right for blacks to be
recognised as “persons”. In the 20th
century people fought and won the right for women to
be recognised as “persons” in their own right.
And we look back on those times and think, “What
were they thinking? Of course blacks and women are
persons.” In the 21st century the fight
continues to have human babies recognised as
“persons” in their own right. Surely future
generations will look back to our time and ask,
“What were they thinking? Of course human babies
are persons, what else would they be?
The
Christian Heritage Party will never abandon that
fight, where others have. Let all Canadians remember
that the preamble to the Canadian Constitution
begins, “Whereas Canada was founded upon
principles which recognise the supremacy of God and
the rule of law…”
The
rule of law, the biblical rule of law, is still the
only sure foundation upon which to build a just and
stable society. No, not a society that idolises
licentiousness, but one that honours true
inalienable, God-given “rights”, surely of which
the “right to life” comes before and trumps all
others.
In
honour of that right, and in recognition that every
human being is wonderfully made in the image of God,
under a CHP government one of the first orders of
business would be to initiate the termination of the
appointment to the Order of Canada of Henry
Morgentaler.
To
Interview
Deputy
Leader Jim Hnatiuk: 1-888-868-3247
|
