December 16, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Yesterday an overwhelming majority of Canada’s MPs, including our so-called Conservative Prime Minister, shockingly rejected Roxanne’s Law, which aimed to ban abortion coercion.

As many pro-lifers pointed out, the legislation was flawed.  It was too easily interpreted to state that abortion is a permissible option, which would make it, in fact, worse than the absence of law we have now.

But the law’s intent was good, and it deserved a chance to get tightened up in committee.  If an MP truly felt the bill as written was unsupportable, the best approach was to abstain or absent himself.

A vote against the bill at this stage, however, comes across as a decision to perpetuate Canada’s disastrous abortion regime.  This vote was a decision to continue a government system that dehumanizes all unborn children, and not merely those who are “unwanted.”

The abortion regimes set up in North America and Europe, and now sadly spreading throughout the world, are not just affecting those children in the womb who are murdered – even though they are obviously the greatest victims by far.  Every one of us is devalued, denied our dignity at our most vulnerable time of life.

I had direct experience with this dehumanizing system the other day.

“How many are in your household?” the woman from StatsCan asked me as part of a mandatory job survey.  “Four.  Me, my wife Jenna, my son Noah, and my wife is expecting.”

The woman was clearly confused.  “Um… you said four?”

“Yes, including the little one in Mommy’s womb.”

The woman quickly caught on to me, and it became clear that she was only marking down the eldest three of us.

This little exchange reminded me that my child has been denied his or her personhood, just like the Jews under Hitler.

This isn’t some kind of theoretical point.  My child has been dehumanized to the extent that if he or she were targeted for murder today, and my wife was beat up to that end, the harshest charge we could expect is assault for attacking my wife.

Just yesterday, a Canadian man was convicted for murdering his wife, who was 32 weeks pregnant.  The child also died after an emergency C-section.  Yet the man, named Turan Cocelli, faced no charge for the second murder, even though there were indications that his actions were motivated in part by the pregnancy.

In Canada, victimized children in the womb have no status before the law, even if the child is “wanted.” 

This was confirmed in yesterday’s vote.  Canada’s legislature chose to continue a government system that welcomes the murder of “wanted” children as much as the “unwanted.”

Pregnant women who want their babies are being pushed to abort under pain of losing shelter or financial support.  Roxanne Fernando, for whom the bill was named, lost her life because she wanted her baby.

Prime Minister Harper justified his vote against Roxanne’s Law by saying he would “oppose any attempt to create a new abortion law.”  He was joined by 177 other MPs from his caucus and the opposition.

It seems our legislature’s commitment to dehumanizing the child in the womb is so strong they will even oppose steps to protect these women.  So strong that they are unwilling to ensure even the “wanted” child is protected from government-funded slaughter.

Many claimed in the debates on Roxanne’s Law that the heinous act of abortion coercion is already covered under general bans on coercion in the Criminal Code.  Yet no one has ever been charged with coercing an abortion.

Roxanne Fernando chose to keep her baby.  She valued that child and wanted to give him a good life.  But even though abortion coercion was clearly at play in Roxanne’s case, that charge did not come up.  Whether covered by the Criminal Code or not, abortion coercion is not on our cultural radar.  Yesterday, Prime Minister Harper and the other MPs ensured that it will stay that way.

The lady from StatsCan later asked me about a trip we took last month to Windsor, Nova Scotia, about an hour away.

“How many household members traveled?”

“Four,” I said.

“Oh yes, including the unborn baby?”

“Yes, there were four of us.”  Again it was clear she was marking down three.

Even if the government and much of our culture refuse to recognize our children, we must never submit.  Standing firm in professing the indispensable and valued role of every child is the least we can do.