In the current Canadian culture, the issue of abortion is off-limits for debate. There is only one position recognized – that abortions be readily available for any reason.
This cone of silence on abortion was developed by the feminist movement, blindly supported by the left-wing legacy media. Due to the enormous funding given only to feminist organizations by the federal and provincial governments over the past fifty years, feminism has prospered with the result that its perspective on abortion has dominated policies on the issue.
Although the feminist movement is controlled by only a handful of professional feminists, and its ideology has not generally been accepted, it has, nonetheless, managed to establish the concept that its ideology is the only recognized and acceptable voice of women. This is absurd. Women, just like men, have differing opinions based on their life experience, education, culture, and faith, etc. There is no single voice for women.
Furthermore, feminism is based on the Marxist theory that societies are engaged in a class struggle between capital and labour. Only, the class struggle in this case is between men (the oppressor), and women (the oppressed). Based on this, feminists ignore the biological and psychological differences between men and women, and insist that the sexes are identical and interchangeable. They argue that women must be empowered, just like men, to be successful, and therefore women must be in paid employment which must be their priority in life.
Pregnancy is the Obvious Difference Between the Sexes
It is difficult, however, to assert that men and women are interchangeable because of the fact that the most prominent difference between men and women is that women become pregnant, but men do not. Consequently, feminists regard an unexpected pregnancy as the worst possible event that could happen to women because it interrupts their work life, which is a priority. As a result, the “product” of pregnancy must be quickly and efficiently removed from the woman’s body so that women are reconditioned to be wombless males. Because of this, abortion, understandably, has become an obsession for feminists. It is not an exaggeration to say that feminists become hysterical at the slightest possibility that access to abortion may be curtailed.
Feminists Deny Complications of Abortion
To ensure that women regard abortion as a normal, natural and reasonable response to an unexpected pregnancy, feminists portray abortion as a simple procedure, similar to a tooth extraction – temporarily uncomfortable but necessary, in order to keep their lives on track. They insist that it is a completely uncomplicated procedure without consequences. They deny, absolutely, the medical, and psychological consequences of the procedure. This means that a woman’s inevitable pain, anguish, bleeding, fear, panic, guilt and depression following the abortion are unacknowledged, leaving the woman to cope with the reality of her difficult experience. A growing number of studies have uncovered disturbing findings of medical[1] and psychological[2] harms, including the prevalence of depression following an abortion[3], as well as infections, sepsis and other medical complications.
Denial that the Child in Utero is a Human Being
In their support of abortion, feminists are also obliged to deny that the unborn child is a human being, insisting that it is only an undeveloped cluster of cells. This argument has been difficult to sustain with the development of ultrasound, where a mother can actually see the child in utero on the screen and hear the child’s heartbeat which begins to beat six weeks after conception.
The 1988 Supreme Court of Canada decision in the Morgentaler case which struck down the abortion law contradicts the feminist interpretation of abortion as being an insignificant and meaningless. The court unanimously encouraged Parliament to pass a new abortion law as soon as possible, compatible with the Charter of Rights, to replace the law struck down, because the State has a “compelling interest” in the child in utero. Even feminist judge, Bertha Wilson, agreed that at some point in the development of the unborn child the State had a “compelling interest” in the child in the womb. This decision indicates that a child in utero has significant value to society and that its termination creates a harm to society. Consequently, the child in utero, is not, as described by feminists, a mere cluster of cells, but in fact, is part of the continuing human family that requires protection under the law.
Shameful Coverup of the Consequences of Abortion
Vested interests in the political, medical and pharmaceutical industries are shamefully covering up the consequences of abortion. Although more and more studies confirm that abortion is linked to breast cancer, the alleged “scientific” consensus is that abortions are without medical consequences. This position is backed by the American Cancer Society, the National Cancer Institute and the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology. These respected institutes deny a link between induced abortion and increased risk of breast cancer. They are more fearful about the possible loss of abortion rights than the health of women. This is because over the past fifty years the ideology of feminism has become embedded in our culture. In addition, no one wants to acknowledge the inconvenient fact that the prescribed termination of pregnancy by abortion is going to increase the risk of breast cancer. Big Pharma is making billions of dollars on medication for abortion, especially the abortion pill and it makes every effort to suppress any information that may expose the dangerous link.
Over twenty years ago, Dr. Joel Brind, a professor of human biology and endocrinology and his team at Baruch College, City University of New York, completed a meta-analysis of abortions that indicated that a woman had a 30% increased chance of developing breast cancer in later life, if she underwent an abortion before giving birth to her first child. His work should have been acclaimed, but was met by denial. The UK Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (RCOG) did a thorough review of Brind’s research which had been published in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, and admitted that Brind’s work had no methodological shortcomings and could not be disregarded. This quickly caused consternation in the vested interests, which promptly disputed the RCOG conclusions. Such a truth was inconvenient. Dr. Brind’s work was ignored and the RCOG reversed its position on his research. Yet nine out of ten subsequent studies, as far afield as China, France, U.S., India and Turkey supported Dr. Brind’s findings. The vested interests, both in the medical and political establishments, doubled their efforts to reassure women that abortion was safe. Oxford University conveniently carried out research denying the link between abortion and breast cancer. Its study served as a basis for the continued denial of the breast cancer link, even though the Oxford study has been criticized for its loopholes.
It has long been established that the incidents of breast cancer increase with age, with the highest rates observed in women aged sixty and over. However, there is now a growing concern about the increase in breast cancer among younger women, particularly in their 20s, 30s and 40s. It is likely that this worrisome trend of increased incidents of breast cancer in younger women may be linked to the increasing number of abortions performed.
The Abortion Pill
The medical harms caused to women by abortion have increased with the growing trend of chemical abortions, using the so-called abortion pill. They are beginning to surpass surgical abortions. A U.S. study was published on April 25, 2025, entitled, The Abortion Pill Harms Women: Insurance Data Reveals One in Ten Patients Experiences a Serious Adverse Event. This study is the largest known study on the abortion pill to date. Researchers evaluated 865,727 abortions through prescriptions of the drug Mifepristone from 2017-2023. They reported in insurance records, and found that almost 11% of all users of this drug, which is incorporated in the abortion pill, experienced some sort of serious adverse complications within 4-5 days of the abortion. The complications included hemorrhage, infection and sepsis. It is likely that the drug manufacturer is already working on how to discredit this study.
Moreover, concerns are now being raised about the abortion pill chemical, Mifepristone, which may be impacting the U.S. wastewater system. The drug is a potent progesterone blocker that disrupts hormonal balance in pregnant women to induce abortion. This raises the question about the drug’s potential endocrine disrupting effects when present in drinking water. Prolonged exposure could potentially interfere with a person’s fertility regardless of the person’s sex. It is an unfortunate fact that much sewage water ends up being filtered through wastewater treatment plants and becomes drinking water. That process does not remove all chemicals in the system. This concern was recently raised in a letter from twenty-five members of the U.S. Congress to President Donald Trump proposing a special committee be established to determine whether sewage water being filtered in treatment plants is leaving a residual of the abortion pill medication. The letter stated, “if the residue of the drug is present in the wastewater there is a strong possibility that it is creating problems for the U.S. public”.
Unless, and until, these lies and manipulation of abortion data are properly and transparently analyzed, not only will millions of unborn babies continue to be killed, but women will also continue to be harmed by the coverup of the vested interests in the abortion industry.
[1] Isabelle Carlsson, Karin Breding, P-G. Larsson, “Complications Related to Induced Abortion: Combined Retrospective and Longitudinal Follow-up Study”, BioMed Central Psychiatry, 25 September 2018.
[2] Natnael A. Gebeyehu, et. Al., “Global prevalence of post-abortion depression: systematic review and Meta-analysis”, BioMed Central Psychiatry, 26 October 2023.
[3] Supra Footnote 2