Bill C-3 is a mini-omnibus bill that combines the promise of ten paid sick days for federal employees with a questionable ban on activities that “interfere” with health care access. It appears the Liberals have resurrected that old, corrupt tactic of presenting two entirely different proposals together – one popular and one controversial – in order to scuttle debate and secure passage of the more controversial matter.
Banning “interference” with health care access raises a lot of questions.
According to Bill C-3: “Every person commits an offence who, without lawful authority, intentionally obstructs or interferes with another person’s lawful access to a place at which health services are provided by a health professional.”
This sounds reasonable on the surface. Physically blocking access to hospitals can jeopardize lives. But is that all the Liberals intend to prohibit? If so, then why a new law, since it is already a crime to intimidate or harass others under our existing laws?
The big question is: What constitutes “interference” in this new proposal? Does it mean counselling an abortion-minded woman on the sidewalk outside a hospital? Could the sidewalk counsellor be charged with “interference” if that woman cancels her appointment with the abortionist? Would the abortionist – who just lost his commission on the killing – not jump at the chance to press charges?
Or could the pregnant woman assert to police that the very act of being shown an anti-abortion message “interfered” with her access to abortion by making her feel “uncomfortable”?
Bill C-3 also states: “Every person commits an offence who engages in any conduct with the intent to provoke a state of fear in… a person in order to impede them from obtaining health services from a health professional.”
Notice that phrase “state of fear.” It is nowhere defined in this bill or in the entire Criminal Code. What does a “state of fear” look like? This concept could certainly be prone to subjective and malleable interpretations.
If peaceful pro-life demonstrators carry signs that show the awful brutality of abortion, would that not qualify as “provoking fear” in onlookers? With messages describing abortion as a crime, a mortal sin, or a human rights abuse, would that not stir up people’s consciences and put the “fear of God” into their souls? We certainly hope so! But will that then be ILLEGAL under Bill C-3? Would not the pro-abortion lobby exploit this new law to persecute pro-lifers?
These are critical questions. After all, the threatened penalty for these new offences is up to TEN YEARS in jail!
All the talk on Parliament Hill and in the media indicates that this Bill is intended to target pro-life protesters, in addition to those who oppose coercive vaccine mandates.
According to a November 26th CTV news article, Bill C-3 is specifically concerned with “health services such as COVID-19 vaccinations or abortion procedures.”
On December 6th, the Liberal Secretary to the Minister of International Trade, MP Arif Virani, said, “we are not just talking about COVID. When we talk about [protecting] the health care apparatus, we have to think about all the health care services that are provided and not just those that address the pandemic. The impacts extend to all those who seek other medical treatments at hospitals and clinics across this country.”
Those “other treatments” would of course include abortion and euthanasia. Justice Minister David Lametti admits, “The new intimidation offence [in Bill C-3] would prohibit any act intended to promote fear in health care professionals… includ[ing] health care professionals working at abortion clinics… The safety and security of abortion health care workers and patients continue to be a troubling issue.”
In response to concerns about Bill C-3’s potential impact on Canadians’ freedom of expression and assembly, we are hearing assurances from various Liberal MPs. David Lametti promises: “Canadians who want to express their opinions in a peaceful way will be able to continue to do so.” MP John Aldag claims, “This legislation would clearly ensure Canadians have the freedom to voice their concerns and protest in a safe and peaceful manner.”
But will this apply to pro-lifers? Or will it only apply to labour union protestors, like in the Saskatchewan “bubble zone” law (Bill 48) which suppresses all health care-related demonstrations outside hospitals with the exception of union protests?
MP Arif Virani asserts: “It [Bill C-3] would not capture peaceful demonstrations.” However, in the same breath, Virani also warns, “The right to protest and to dissent is one thing… However, obstructing patients and health care personnel and trying to strike fear into their hearts and minds is something that cannot and should not be tolerated.”
The Knights of Columbus in Quebec have apparently begun to pressurize and bully unvaccinated council members and officers who decline to take the COVID jab.
Please SIGN and SHARE this petition to the Quebec Knights of Columbus, urging the Catholic men's fraternal organization to reverse course and stop penalizing Knights who refuse these unethical, untested and unsafe vaccines.
According to a letter obtained by LifeSiteNews, the leaders of the Quebec State Council of the Knights have seemingly implemented the following restrictions on unvaccinated members: 1) Effective immediately, unvaccinated knights shall be refused access to meeting and social venues; and, 2) Effective November 15th, any officer not "fully vaccinated" shall be relieved of his duties.
If true (and, there is no reason to believe it is not accurate), this Quebec Knights' policy is not only deeply flawed, but also deeply disturbing.
Indeed, the Catholic Church teaches that a Catholic may use his or her conscience to decide to licitly refuse vaccination.
And, while the Church is allowing Catholics to take these unethical vaccines because of the lack of an ethically produced and tested vaccine, it must noted that the Church IS AGAINST FORCED VACCINATION and vaccine mandates.
Therefore, it is difficult to fathom how a Catholic organization can penalize (and, in effect, try to coerce) Catholics to accept vaccines which have many morally and medically troubling aspects.
To start with, all COVID vaccines available to Knights Quebecois were either developed or tested using aborted fetal cell lines! This very fact should militate against penalizing Knights who cannot accept these jabs, in good conscience, as morally repugnant per se.
And, there are at least three other serious issues with the vaccines, namely:
- The vaccines are, themselves, unsafe. The WHO has already reported over 2.1M injuries related to COVID jabs, worldwide.
- The vaccines do not effectively stop transmission, and, in fact, probably facilitate transmission by allowing a vaccinated person to carry a large viral load which they can then spread to vaccinated and unvaccinated, alike.
- It is unwise to take and promote vaccines which have not undergone sufficient testing (animal, and otherwise), and which have no track record for possible long-term negative complications. Whereas most vaccines have taken between six and ten years to be fully tested and approved, these COVID jabs have only been given for less than a year -- and so, we do not know what the long-term effects will be.
With these issues in mind, please SIGN and SHARE this petition which calls on the Quebec Knights of Columbus State Council to reverse the draconian restrictions being placed against unvaccinated Knights.
The Quebec Knights of Columbus should be prepared to make reasonable accommodations for those members and officers who have decided to refuse these unethical, untested and unsafe vaccines.
After signing, please take a few minutes to contact the Quebec Knights of Columbus to politely, but firmly, ask them to reverse this decision which could seriously impinge on their fellow Knights' ability to follow their consciences in relation to taking a COVID vaccine.
Quebec Knights of Columbus Telephone Numbers: 450-768-0616 or 1866-893-3681
Quebec Knights of Columbus Email: [email protected]
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
**Photo Credit: Joseph Sohm / Shutterstock.com
This is our primary concern with Bill C-3. All the promises in the world from every Liberal MP in caucus mean very little if the police and courts begin arresting pro-life demonstrators and sidewalk counsellors simply because the pro-aborts allege we are “interfering” with abortion access or claim we are striking “fear” into abortion-minded women.
Given the politicized state of our current legal system, I have no confidence whatsoever in the Liberals’ promises. I am worried that this new law will very quickly be used as a political weapon to punish pro-lifers and silence our voices in the public square. The fact that Justin Trudeau has pledged to deny charitable status to pro-life charities leaves little room for doubt in my mind that Bill C-3 is designed to target pro-life expression.
And if we are silenced, who is left to speak up for the unborn?
One last item of concern in Bill C-3 is the enormous scope of this legislation.
Unlike typical “bubble zone” laws that we see in various provinces, this Bill C-3 does not specify any limits on its reach. It does not restrict its application to a 50-metre area around hospitals or abortion clinics. In fact, it seemingly turns the entire country into one big “bubble zone” – because it applies everywhere!
Could this result in the prohibition of all pro-life protests – including Canada’s largest annual political protest – the March for Life?
We all agree that true harassment and intimidation are wrong – and the pro-life movement, which defends human life and dignity, does not engage in these dark tactics. However, if pro-life protests get falsely labelled as “interfering” with health care access, or as “provoking a state of fear” in patients, then we could see the end of all pro-life witnessing in Canada. All it would take is one “woke” activist judge to apply this new law to us.
That’s why I am asking you to reach out to your local MP today to express your concerns about Bill C-3. It is possible that this bill could pass into law within days, so it is urgent you speak up now.
Reprinted with permission from Campaign Life Coalition