FREE access to the digital edition and archives until September 2. Click here.

The Catholic Register

Browse2011 › February

February 2011


February 23


Talking (Lying??) About Abortion

February 23, 2011

In three totally different arenas conversations and arguments about abortion and the way we talk about abortion are being vigorously being pursued. The story of Linda Gibbons (see as well the most recent story in the Catholic Register) and the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada to hear arguments about the matter has the potential to bring one of the least talked about legal sagas of the age into public awareness. The facts are pretty straightforward. Long time pro-life activist Gibbons refuses to obey the bubble zone space around abortion clinics. Bubble Zones around abortion clinics have been argued in the courts in Ontario and B.C. and are defended by pro-choice advocates on the grounds of a reasonable limit on free speech rights. For a decade and a half, this quiet spoken and seemingly harmless woman insists on her rights to free expression and has spent more than a half dozen years in total in jail as a consequence. This is a true hot button issue and the Supreme Court of Canada hearing has the potential to bring abortion once again into the mainstream public square. Ian Hunter, a former professor of law at the University of Western Ontario has written a truly fine piece about the Gibbons story that might make even strong individuals weep. On a completely different note is the story of whether Canadian Pop Mega Star, Justin Bieber is pro-life. The whole ‘controversy’ flows out of an interview in Rolling Stone Magazine. Bieber's thoughts on sex without love, homosexuality and abortion are acquiring a gravitas normally reserved for philosophers such as Charles Taylor. Granted Rolling Stone magazine has apologized for ‘editing’ Bieber’s comments on abortion incorrectly at least twice, but the upshot seems to be that the teen star is pro-life, even in the case of rape. This has led to some seriously interesting outbursts. Some, like John Hines, want to know why we ask Bieber tough questions (Hines’ column is a hoot for a number of reasons especially his disbelief that Bieber might actually prefer Canada to the United States). Danny Groner, at The Huffington Post figures the Rolling Stone Interview and the release of the Bieber movie is simply a good time to worry about what Bieber’s fame says about society. And others just decided to nail the kid to the wall, Kathryn Olivarius of the Yale Daily News thinks Bieber’s comments are dangerous, the Folks at The View suggested that Bieber had no right to his opinions at all, and at the Toronto Star the attitude is just “leave him alone” he’s a kid. The thought experiment the whole episode raises is…given how we expect celebrities to have opinions and have built an economic structure around celebrity influence in society, what is it about Bieber’s views that has so many riled? If Justin Bieber raises hard issues about acceptable views on abortion and the Linda Gibbons case raises intriguing questions about free speech for all, including pro-life folks, the real tough philosophical quandary has been provoked by Live Action’s video stings of Planned Parenthood operations in the United States. Lila Rose is an up and comer in the pro-life world. She and her truly youthful organization have been using undercover stings (you can see examples of the video at the organization’s website) to expose egregious aspects of the world of Planned Parenthood and the procurement of abortions. Some of her team’s work has led to criminal investigations, employees getting fired and the cut-off of funds to Planned Parenthood. And LifeSiteNews has reported in the past that Lila Rose and Live Action are planning on coming to Canada. But while many pro-life groups and activists were celebrating the work of Live Action a serious question about tactics and means was being raised. “Is Lying in the pursuit of a good end justifiable”. It has turned into a fascinating debate…conducted with true intellectual vigour on the web site Public Discourse, reflected on by Princeton Legal Scholar and Theological heavy weight Robert George in Mirror of Justice, debated thoroughly on the National Catholic Register and responded to by the good folks at Live Action. Given the stakes, given the nature of the argument, it is a debate following and taking part in.


Talking (Lying??) About Abortion

February 23, 2011

In three totally different arenas conversations and arguments about abortion and the way we talk about abortion are being vigorously being pursued. The story of Linda Gibbons (see as well the most recent story in the Catholic Register) and the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada to hear arguments about the matter has the potential to bring one of the least talked about legal sagas of the age into public awareness. The facts are pretty straightforward. Long time pro-life activist Gibbons refuses to obey the bubble zone space around abortion clinics. Bubble Zones around abortion clinics have been argued in the courts in Ontario and B.C. and are defended by pro-choice advocates on the grounds of a reasonable limit on free speech rights. For a decade and a half, this quiet spoken and seemingly harmless woman insists on her rights to free expression and has spent more than a half dozen years in total in jail as a consequence. This is a true hot button issue and the Supreme Court of Canada hearing has the potential to bring abortion once again into the mainstream public square. Ian Hunter, a former professor of law at the University of Western Ontario has written a truly fine piece about the Gibbons story that might make even strong individuals weep. On a completely different note is the story of whether Canadian Pop Mega Star, Justin Bieber is pro-life. The whole ‘controversy’ flows out of an interview in Rolling Stone Magazine. Bieber's thoughts on sex without love, homosexuality and abortion are acquiring a gravitas normally reserved for philosophers such as Charles Taylor. Granted Rolling Stone magazine has apologized for ‘editing’ Bieber’s comments on abortion incorrectly at least twice, but the upshot seems to be that the teen star is pro-life, even in the case of rape. This has led to some seriously interesting outbursts. Some, like John Hines, want to know why we ask Bieber tough questions (Hines’ column is a hoot for a number of reasons especially his disbelief that Bieber might actually prefer Canada to the United States). Danny Groner, at The Huffington Post figures the Rolling Stone Interview and the release of the Bieber movie is simply a good time to worry about what Bieber’s fame says about society. And others just decided to nail the kid to the wall, Kathryn Olivarius of the Yale Daily News thinks Bieber’s comments are dangerous, the Folks at The View suggested that Bieber had no right to his opinions at all, and at the Toronto Star the attitude is just “leave him alone” he’s a kid. The thought experiment the whole episode raises is…given how we expect celebrities to have opinions and have built an economic structure around celebrity influence in society, what is it about Bieber’s views that has so many riled? If Justin Bieber raises hard issues about acceptable views on abortion and the Linda Gibbons case raises intriguing questions about free speech for all, including pro-life folks, the real tough philosophical quandary has been provoked by Live Action’s video stings of Planned Parenthood operations in the United States. Lila Rose is an up and comer in the pro-life world. She and her truly youthful organization have been using undercover stings (you can see examples of the video at the organization’s website) to expose egregious aspects of the world of Planned Parenthood and the procurement of abortions. Some of her team’s work has led to criminal investigations, employees getting fired and the cut-off of funds to Planned Parenthood. And LifeSiteNews has reported in the past that Lila Rose and Live Action are planning on coming to Canada. But while many pro-life groups and activists were celebrating the work of Live Action a serious question about tactics and means was being raised. “Is Lying in the pursuit of a good end justifiable”. It has turned into a fascinating debate…conducted with true intellectual vigour on the web site Public Discourse, reflected on by Princeton Legal Scholar and Theological heavy weight Robert George in Mirror of Justice, debated thoroughly on the National Catholic Register and responded to by the good folks at Live Action. Given the stakes, given the nature of the argument, it is a debate following and taking part in.


February 24


Unity through prayer and communion

February 24, 2011

Editor’s note: This is the second place winner for the Friars Student Writing Award contest sponsored by the Franciscan Friars of the Atonement-Graymoor in Toronto and The Catholic Register. Jesus chose not one, but 12 Apostles to spread the message of His love. He believed that unified, the Apostles could better carry out the work of spreading God’s love since they had the support of their fellow apostolic brothers. Although the Christian Church today has been factionalized into various denominations, we are called to share in the brotherhood through the empowerment we receive as apostles spreading God’s teachings. Teaching is one of those occupations no one is barred from. Everyone has the power to influence others through their teachings. As apostles of God, we are to teach the universal message that God tells all Christians: That there is no commandment greater than to “love your neighbour as yourself” (Matthew 22:38). In order to accomplish this, we need to aspire to lives that will be the epitome of God’s love to everyone we come in contact with. What better way to do so than to unite ourselves as Christians in our evangelistic teaching of God’s word. This is because if our actions towards others reflect God’s love, then others can learn by observing our relationship with fellow Christians. What better way to teach than to practise what you preach? On the matter of preaching God’s word, we can recount the lives of the early Christians who faced persecution for preaching the Word of God. They bravely faced death instead of renouncing their faith. There was a driving force behind this courage; a reason for their unwavering faith. It was the knowledge that the cause for which they were being persecuted was a worthy one; the knowledge that they were laying the groundwork for other Christians to follow; the knowledge that their sacrifices for the Church would serve to draw those strong in the faith even closer together; the knowledge that they had the backing of their fellow Christians ready to continue where they left off. Having this kind of trust in anyone is profoundly encouraging, especially at times such as these with news of persecutions among our fellow Christians like those in Pakistan, Somalia, Egypt, Vietnam and everywhere a Christian is criticized for their faith. Such trust can only be forged on deep bonds of brotherhood and one good way to forge bonds is by praying together. Jesus prayed and taught His disciples to do so too because He understood the strength provided by solidarity in prayer. Through prayer, God yearns for us to break down all barriers, including those of denomination, that restrict us from being one not just with Him but also with our fellow Christians. His son, Jesus, died to unify Christians with the assurance that we will have eternal redemption. He died not for one denomination, “but to gather all children of God who are scattered abroad” (John 11:52). And so the Communion (sharing of the bread) is a resonating theme among all Christian denominations and further proof of the similarities Christians have in common. Let us, therefore, surge on in forging and maintaining our ties of Christian fellowship among all denominations through our prayers. Let our actions reflect the true teachings of God’s unconditional love of unity and equality. Most importantly, “I plead with you brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment” (1 Corinthians 1:10). For when all is stripped away from us, we are left with nothing but our faith. And since we all share the same faith, are we then not fundamentally the same? (Chigbo, 16, is a Grade 12 student at St. Francis Xavier Secondary School in Mississauga, Ont.)