REALity  Volume XXXVI  Issue no. 11 November 2017

Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne wants absolute control over the children living in her province. She knows that if she controls them, future generations will carry on with her repulsive values in which she is, at present, indoctrinating Ontario children.  She is accomplishing this by her appalling sex-education curriculum in schools.  Also, children living in their own Ontario homes with their families, can be whisked away by the Children’s Aid under the Supporting Children, Youth and Families Act, 2017 (formerly, The Family Law Act). The Act provides a long list of criteria for removal of a child upon any child’s whymsical “creed” by which he/she can request, among other things, to be transgendered or have access to abortion, contrary to his/her family’s values.

On October 4, 2017 the Wynne government announced the facilitating of death for children in the womb by way of the proposed Bill 163, “Protecting a Woman’s Right to Access Abortion Services Act”. This is one of the most ludicrous bills ever introduced in the history of the Ontario legislature.  The bill proposes to create an abortion bubble zone to protect abortionists, their workers and clinics, their homes as well as pharmacists (who can provide the abortion pill R-486).

This bill is based on absolutely no evidence whatsoever.

By presenting this bill, Ontario Attorney General, Yasir Naqvi, has exposed himself to be a totally inadequate Attorney General. According to press reports, Naqvi, “seemed on the verge of tears” when repeating the preposterous myth that a woman had been spat upon when she went to a clinic.  If Naqvi believes and relies on this anecdote and mythical “harassment” of women entering the clinic to support his extremist legislation, he is surely a talking marionette manipulated by strings held by Kathleen Wynne. Naqvi also stated that a woman has the “right” to choose on abortion.  There is no “right” to abortion in Canada.  An Attorney General should know better.  If he does not, he should not be in his cabinet position.  It is astonishing that Pakistan born Naqvi would allow himself to be used in this way as this bill is a perversion of democracy.  His own father came to Canada to obtain the freedom denied him in Pakistan, when he was imprisoned for leading a pro-democracy march.

Yet, Naqvi’s Bill-163 prohibits, in “access zones”, an astonishing list of activities, which are all protected under the Charter of Rights, such as freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, freedom of religion and freedom of association.

For example, section 3 of the bill provides that, any person is prohibited from:

a) advising or persuading a person from accessing abortion services;

b) informing a person on issues related to abortion services by any means, including oral, written or graphic means;

c) performing, or attempting to perform, an act of disapproval concerning abortion services;

[would a frown qualify?];

d) requesting a person refrain from accessing abortion services by

  1. continuously observing the clinic or facility, or persons entering or leaving the facility; [must one’s eyes now be downcast when walking past an abortion clinic on their way to and from work; would such glances be regarded as “pervasive”?]
  2. physically interfering with that person;
  3. intimidating that person. [No definition is provided as to the meaning of “intimidation” or “persuading”, so supposedly any disapproval will do to contravene this Act;] and
  4. photographing, filming, videotaping, or sketching that person.

Under section 4, for the “access zone” of the residence of an abortion provider, it is prohibited for anyone to,

a) act or show disapproval directed at the abortion provider; [that frown again?]

b) request the provider refrain from providing abortion services; and

c) observe the residents of the abortion providers, or a member of his household; intimidate a provider or a member of his household for photograph, film, videotape, sketch, or in any way record the provider or a member of his or her household. [Again, must one’s eyes now be downcast when walking past an abortionist’s residence on their way to and from work?]

 

Section 4 prohibits, among other things, “observing the provider, or communicating by telephone, fax or electronic means with him or her”.

The buffer zone for the abortion clinic is 50 meters, which may be extended to 150 meters on request.  This buffer zone also applies to the abortionist’s residence.

Contravention of these provisions will result in a fine of not more than $5,000 or imprisonment of not more than six months.   In the case of a second or subsequent offence, a person is subject to a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment of not more than one year.

This shameful legislation is absolutely offensive. Attorney General Naqvi must have sat up many nights, mopping his brow and working diligently with the abortion providers and pro-abortion activist groups to come up with all manner of measures to stop those supposedly “wicked” pro-lifers from interfering with the profitable business of forcibly removing babies from their mother’s womb.

Are not women, who are pregnant and distressed, entitled to care and for support from others, and entitled to learn of alternatives to killing their baby? Shouldn’t these women be provided with the highly esteemed “choice” during such a difficult time in their life, rather than being steamrolled into the life-destroying decision, which will haunt most women for the rest of their lives?

Naqvi’s bill is striving mightily to protect the profits of the abortion industry so that its customers will not be deterred from coming. He also does not want the abortionists to have to consider the morality of their terrible work and to experience the open disdain with which they are held by much of the population.  Most abortionists and their assistants prefer to work in secret, while raking in the money and being protected by the corrupt and amoral Ontario Government.