Justin Trudeau, leader of the Liberal Party of Canada |
Justin Trudeau, leader of the Liberal
Party of Canada and son of the late Pierre Elliott Trudeau, prime
minister from 1968 to 1984, recently attempted to further entrench
Canada’s abortion extremism with a prohibition on pro-life candidates
running for his party. Surprisingly, his policy has attracted nearly
universal condemnation, including strong criticism by two of Canada’s
senior archbishops. Canada’s abortion politics are unique. There is no law on abortion at
all, so an extreme abortion licence – any time for any reason –
prevails.
Over decades, public opinion surveys reflect that a majority of
Canadians would like to see some restrictions on abortion, with a small
minority preferring total prohibition. Nevertheless, the substance of
the issue has not been raised in the federal parliament for more than 25
years. The prime minister, Stephen Harper, is emphatic that his
government will not “re-open” the abortion debate, even going so far as
to dissuade his members of parliament from advancing private member’s
bills on the issue. The opposition leaders, Thomas Mulcair of the New
Democratic Party and Justin Trudeau of the Liberal Party, both
explicitly favour Canada’s extreme abortion licence. An odd consensus
therefore prevails. Canada’s legal situation is similar to that in the
United States, but without any of the American debate or efforts to
change the status quo. Canadians do not support the current abortion
regime, but are apparently tolerant of the consensus on not doing
anything about it.
On the eve of the annual March for Life in Ottawa, Trudeau announced
that all candidates for the Liberal Party in the 2015 federal election
would have to pledge to vote against any restrictions on Canada’s
unlimited abortion regime. There are only a few pro-life MPs in the
Liberals’ small 34-member caucus, and the party has been resolutely in
favour of abortion rights for more than a generation. Practically, the
new policy would have little effect on the absence of an abortion law in
Canada, but it did represent a departure from previous Liberal
practice, in which pro-life MPs were tolerated, even if isolated.
The political advantage that Trudeau was trying to achieve was
therefore unclear. The political blowback was immediate. Leading
pro-choice female columnists at socially liberal Canadian papers blasted
Trudeau for being intolerant of dissenting views. Political opponents
and a wide array of commentators decried the policy, and several senior
Liberals publicly disagreed with Trudeau, which itself is uncommon under
Canada’s unusually strict party discipline. One of the most devastating
attacks came from Clifford Lincoln, an immensely respected former
Liberal member of both the Quebec legislature and the federal
Parliament. “In the caucuses in which I served, diversity of views and
positions on ‘conscience’ issues varied sometimes widely,” Lincoln
wrote. “I have no doubt certain potential candidates with extreme views
were quietly dissuaded from running, but there were never any formal
edicts or prohibitions regarding ‘conscience’ or other positions. So
[Trudeau’s] decision is a fundamental departure from Liberal Party
tradition. It is doctrinaire, judgmental and, in my modest view, the
antithesis of liberalism.”
The response from the Catholic bishops was equally forthright.
Cardinal Thomas Collins of Toronto wrote an open letter to Trudeau,
inviting him to “reconsider” his position, as it made it impossible for
faithful Catholics to run for his party. Collins wryly noted that
Trudeau’s edict would disqualify Pope Francis from becoming a Liberal
candidate. The archdiocese of Toronto reported that they had never
received as many responses on any other issue as they had on the Trudeau
letter, and almost all of them were favourable.
Archbishop Terrence Prendergast of Ottawa, the national capital,
pointed out that Trudeau’s position, despite his claims to be a
practising Catholic, is simply not compatible with the Catholic faith.
“A person who takes a position in contradiction to the teaching of the
Catholic Church on the value and dignity of human life from the moment
of conception to the moment of a natural death, and persists in this
belief, is not in communion with the Church’s values and teaching, which
we believe faithfully transmit for today the teachings of Christ,”
Prendergast wrote in a statement sent to all his parishes.
Stung by the near-universal rejection of his edict, Trudeau
interrupted the first bank holiday weekend of the summer to issue a
“personal reflection”. He did not recant.
As it is curious for the leader of the third party in parliament to
specify groups of voters that are not welcome in his party, Trudeau was
eager to ensure pro-life citizens that they are most welcome to vote
Liberal, to volunteer for the party and donate to it. As for their
pro-life views, they are to work on reconciling (resigning?) themselves
to the fact that their view will be forbidden from being spoken inside
the Liberal caucus. “I know [my policy] has troubled some Canadians, and
come as welcome words to others,” Trudeau wrote. “To those it has
troubled: I understand. I empathise. And I care deeply that you are
working hard to reconcile your beliefs with this party policy.”
Notwithstanding Trudeau’s deep caring, to hold that Canadian laws
should reflect a pro-life position is not easily reconciled with his
position that pro-life positions are a disqualification from serving in
parliament. His proposed reconciliation was breathtaking: he invited
pro-life Liberals to sign a petition in favour of unlimited abortion
rights.
Pro-life Canadians welcomed the strong secular, Catholic and even
Liberal Party opposition to Trudeau’s edict. Yet he shows no sign of
backing down from it, and therefore it not only entrenches Canada’s
extreme abortion regime, but takes a step toward the exclusion from
public life of anyone who questions it. Trudeau may suffer a political
price from his prohibition on pro-life Canadians. But they remain
prohibited in his party.
Fr Raymond J. de Souza is a priest of the Archdiocese of Kingston, Ontario, and editor-in-chief of Convivium magazine.
No comments:
Post a Comment