---

SHARE THIS PAGE: E-mail  Print

---

---

CONCERN THAT PROPOSED TERRORISM LAW COULD TARGET PRO-LIFERS

OTTAWA, October 17, 2001 (LSN.ca) - An anti-terrorism bill entailing broad powers of arrest and detention and a massive loss of rights of the accused has pro-lifers concerned since the legislation's definition of terrorism could be interpreted to include pro-life groups. The apprehension is warranted given a government intelligence agency document which includes the "pro-life movement" under the category of "single issue terrorism." (see the Canadian Security Intelligence Service CSIS document: http://www.csis-scrs.gc.ca/eng/comment/com74_e.html)

Presented in the House of Commons Monday, the Liberal Government's the Anti-Terrorism Act, Bill C-36, would allow for arrest and confinement by police for up to 72 hours on mere suspicion of criminal offense, and also remove the right of the accused to be silent so as to avoid self-incrimination. (see the bill at:
http://www.parl.gc.ca/37/1/parlbus/chambus/house/bills/government/C-36/C-36_1/C-...)
Whereas U.S. anti-terrorism legislation has a sunset clause with which the legislation will expire after 4 years the Canadian bill includes a review of the legislation in three years but not an expiry.

The definition of terrorism in bill C-36 includes "an act or omission...committed in whole or in part for a political, religious or ideological purpose, objective or cause" ... "that is intended to...cause serious interference with or serious disruption of an essential service, facility or system, whether public or private." Although this portion of the definition could be applied to legitimate forms of protest, the legislation's definition exempts "lawful advocacy, protest, dissent or stoppage of work that does not involve an activity that is intended to result in" conduct causing death, bodily harm, endangering life, or risk to health or safety.

Given the wide-ranging powers of the proposed legislation and the broad interpretation that the bill would sustain, the legislation is being looked at critically by advocates of free speech. However, the government is pressing for quick passage of the bill before adequate analysis can be completed. Karen Murawsky, National Affairs Director for Campaign Life Coalition told LifeSite, "The enforcement of this legislation could be dangerous and possibly used against us without cause."

One Liberal MP discussing the legislation in the House yesterday specifically mentioned pro-life protest as exempt from the legislation. Pat O'Brien (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for International Trade) supported the legislation saying it contained safeguards protecting "legitimate political activism and protest." In a short list of legitimate protestors he mentioned Fr. Tony Van Hee, who has for years protested on Parliament Hill. In a reference to Fr. Van Hee, O'Brien mentioned "an individual priest here day after day expressing his strong pro-life views."

See yesterday's Hansard at:
http://www.parl.gc.ca/37/1/parlbus/chambus/house/debates/095_2001-10-16/HAN095-E...

 Back to Top

---

OBEYING UNITED NATIONS NEPAL LEGALIZES ABORTION

KATHMANDU, October 17, 2001 (LSN.ca) - Less than two months after being told to do so by the United Nations, Nepal's MPs have, for the first time, voted to legalize abortion. On Tuesday Oct. 9, the House of Representatives approved the 11th Amendment to the Civil Code allowing abortion in cases of rape or incest up to 10 weeks into the pregnancy and abortion at any time where pregnancy poses any danger to the physical or mental health of the mother or if the child will be disabled.

Agence France Presse reported that 112 MPs in the 205-member house voted for the bill and 92 voted against. According to the bill, a woman's husband or guardian must give consent for the abortion in all cases. Parliamentary officials suggested that the bill would pass the Upper House and be signed by King Gyanendra within two months.

LifeSite has obtained the UN committee document explicitly demanding Nepal to legalize abortion. Although the UN claims it does not promote abortions in countries where the practice is against the law, on August 31, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights did just that. In its Concluding Observations of the Committee on Nepal, the UN Committee states, "The Committee urges the State party to take remedial action to address the problems of clandestine abortions, unwanted pregnancies and the high rate of maternal mortality. In this regard, the Committee urges the State party to reinforce reproductive and sexual health programmes, in particular in rural areas, and to allow abortion when pregnancies are life threatening or a result of rape or incest."

(with files from Pro-Life E-News)

 Back to Top

---

CONGRESSIONAL HEARING ON CHINA'S COERCIVE POPULATION CONTROL

WASHINGTON, October 17, 2001 (LSN.ca) - An investigation of the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) activities in China by the Population Research Institute (PRI) prompted a Congressional hearing on coercive forms of population control in China, held today. The hearing, entitled "Coercive Population Control in China: New Evidence of Forced Abortion and Sterilization", heard testimony from PRI President Steven Mosher and the lead investigator of the PRI-sponsored investigation of UNFPA operations in China.

During its recent investigation in China, a team of PRI investigators discovered a policy of forced abortion and sterilization enforced in a region where UNFPA operates. UNFPA, however, claims that family planning operations in this region where it operates are purely voluntary.

PRI has obtained testimonies from women in this county confirming that women may have a second child only if their first child is a girl. However, a woman must wait four years before becoming pregnant again. In the interim, women are forced to wear IUDs to prevent "illegal" pregnancies. Women who violate this policy are ordered to have abortions and sterilizations on pain of imprisonment, fines, and the destruction of their homes and property.

The UNFPA denies that coercion exists in counties where it operates. But at the hearing, PRI presented evidence showing that brute force is used on women who violate coercive family planning policies.

Interviews conducted by PRI in China include the following:

Woman: Right now, things are very, very strict.. Giving birth to an extra child is difficult, very, very difficult to have a child.
Questioner: How did they know you had a baby?
Woman: They found out. Someone told them.
Questioner: Then the family planning workers came to your house. Did a whole troop of them come?
Woman: A lot of them came. Many, many people.
Questioner: What if you hid?
Woman: That wouldn't work. They would tear down my house. (Points at the ceiling). They would wreck it.

And the following:

Woman: I was four-and-a-half months pregnant. They wanted me to report to the hospital for an abortion but I refused to go. I went into hiding in my mother's village. Then my brother, my older sister, and my younger sister were all arrested. I had no choice but to go somewhere else to hide. They arrested three people in my mother's family but didn't destroy any homes. They arrested six people in my mother-in-law's family and destroyed three homes.
Man: Look at this. All of the doors and windows destroyed. Here's a big hole that they knocked in the wall [with jackhammers]. It took forty bags of cement to repair the holes.

PRI also interviewed women in a hospital waiting room. One woman, too young at 19 years of age to get married-the minimum age is 23-had been ordered to report for an abortion. As she disappeared into the operating room, PRI asked her three friends: "Would she like to keep her baby?" "Oh, yes," they replied, "But the law forbids it."

During its investigations, PRI located, through local officials, a UNFPA office desk within the County Government Building in the Office of Family Planning, the office responsible for enforcing the coercive family planning policy in this county. PRI confirmed that UNFPA works with, in and through this Office of Family Planning in this region.

 Back to Top

---

OPPOSITION PARTIES IN SPAIN WANT TO ALLOW MORE ABORTIONS

MADRID, October 17, 2001 (LSN.ca) - Despite serious concerns about the declining population level, Spanish legislators are urging greater access to abortion. Several opposition parties in the Spanish Parliament are urging more liberal abortion laws. El Mundo, reported yesterday on the frustration of five pro-abortion opposition parties who want the parliament to consider allowing more abortions. PSOE, the leading opposition party, supports an extension of the law to allow abortions on the grounds of "serious personal, family or social conflict" and no longer make them punishable with a prison sentence.

According to demographer Juan Antonio Fernandez of Spain's Superior Council for Scientific Research, Spain is in dire circumstances as its birth rate of 1.2 (the world's lowest) threatens to crash the country's social-welfare system. Spain will require at least four times its current population by 2050 to support its retirees, says Dr. Fernandez.

At present, women in Spain can have an abortion if pregnancy poses a risk to physical or mental health, if the pregnancy was the result of rape or if there are defects in the foetus. Official data recorded about 54,000 babies were killed by abortion in 1998 in the country and RU-486 went on sale in some hospitals and abortuaries in February 2000. The abortifacient morning-after-pill went on sale in Spain in May 2001.

See the El Mundo coverage from Northern Light at:
http://library.northernlight.com/FC20011016660000589.html?cb=0&dx=1006&sc=0#doc

 Back to Top

---

POPE: ALL POLITICAL ACTIONS MUST BE EVALUATED BY THEIR IMPACT ON FAMILY

VATICAN, October 17, 2001 (LSN.ca) - In a message to the head of the Italian Bishops Conference on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of the publication of the apostolic exhortation "Familiaris Consortio," Pope John Paul II called for politicians to consider the importance of the family.

In the letter the pope wrote the "cultural, social and political initiatives" must consider "first of all, the protection of human life, marriage and the family." He said the family must be the "measure of all political action" and denounced measures which focus solely "on individuals neglecting or worse still, penalizing the family." The pope called for a "radical change" to bring "the value of marriage and family" back to central importance. The pope stressed that the legal institution of marriage should be used by governments to discern between "the authentic family with its inalienable rights and other types of cohabitation."

A copy of the pope's letter is available (In Italian) at:
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/speeches/2001/october/documents/h...

 Back to Top

---

LIFESITE NEWSBYTES

CELINE DION'S IVF DOCTOR SENT TO JAIL FOR FRAUD
The New York fertility (IVF) doctor whose patients have included singer Celine Dion was sentenced yesterday to more than seven years in prison for tricking insurance companies into paying for procedures that were not covered. Niels Lauersen, 64, was also ordered to pay $3.2 million in restitution and $17,500 in fines.
http://inq.philly.com/content/inquirer/2001/10/16/national/DOCTOR16.htm

IRISH PRO-LIFE GROUP REJECTS PROPOSED IRISH ABORTION LEGISLATION
In a communication sent to LifeSite News, Human Life International Ireland rejected proposed legislation on abortion which defines life in the womb as beginning at implantation rather than fertilization.

 Back to Top

---

US NEWS ROUNDUP

ARIZONA ABORTIONIST UNDER FIRE FOR SEXUAL ASSAULT
Dr. Brian Finkel, a high-profile Phoenix Arizona abortionist, has had his license "summarily suspended" amid allegations that he sexually assaulted several patients. However, a Maricopa County Superior Court judge ordered a delay in the suspension pending a formal administrative hearing on Nov. 5.
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/breaking/1016finkel-ON.html

WAL-MART SUED OVER CONTRACEPTIVE COVERAGE
A 22-year-old female Wal-Mart employee filed a lawsuit against the giant retailer Tuesday claiming discrimination against women since contraceptive coverage is not included in its health insurance plan. The case, filed in federal district court in Atlanta, seeks reimbursement for all employees who paid for their own prescription contraceptives during the past 2 years.
http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/20011017/3544986s.htm

 Back to Top

---

SHARE THIS PAGE: E-mail  Print

---

---

MORE NEWS: LifeSiteNews.com Home Page  Last 10 Days   Archives   Special Reports

Copyright © LifeSiteNews.com. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivatives License. You may republish this article or portions of it without request provided the content is not altered and it is clearly attributed to "LifeSiteNews.com". Any website publishing of complete or large portions of original LifeSiteNews articles MUST additionally include a live link to www.LifeSiteNews.com. The link is not required for excerpts. Republishing of articles on LifeSiteNews.com from other sources as noted is subject to the conditions of those sources.