Contact us now: Phone: +111111111



Defending the National Conscience

Tue, June 04, 2019   |   Author: Rod Taylor   |   Volume 26    Issue 22 | Share: Facebook | Twitter   

Thank God for giving each of us a conscience! Without a conscience, there would be no inner prompting, either to do good or to refrain from doing evil. Because God has written the law in our hearts (“written it to our hard drive,” to paraphrase), we can know how to avoid the things that displease our Maker, the Creator of heaven and earth. For greater clarity, He has also given us His written word, the Bible, a clear revelation of His will for mankind. No human being has to be ignorant of God’s will in the big issues and most of secular society—even those who deny God’s existence—have agreed that the basic precepts laid out in his word are worth following.

“Don’t commit murder. Don’t lie. Don’t steal. Don’t commit adultery.” These are basic moral principles that only the most rebellious of our fellow citizens dare to challenge at face value. However, the hardcore Left—including the PM and his Liberal caucus, the Greens, the NDP, the Red Tories, the sold-out leftist media and the compromised education establishment—have redefined the issues of life to such an extent that they allow the killing of innocent life and call it “choice” for abortion and “death with dignity” for euthanasia.

With the national conscience at such a low ebb, it is refreshing to have principled politicians—like MP David Anderson—remind Canadians of the importance of allowing our fellow citizens to obey the dictates of their individual consciences in matters of life and death. On October 30, 2018, the Hon. David Anderson tabled Bill C-418, An Act to Amend the Criminal Code (Medical Assistance in Dying). On May 29, 2019, the bill had its first hour of debate.

Mr. Anderson began by laying out the need for his bill: “For a great many Canadian doctors, the core of their conscience prohibits their participation in taking a life.” MP Rachael Harder of Lethbridge also helped in the first hour of debate by defending and promoting the concept of conscience protection: “We should be able to engage in the career of our choice and have our ethical and moral values respected. We should be able to function according to our conscience.”

It is simply a fact that if we allow the state to impose its values upon citizens to the extent that they may no longer refrain from acts that they consider evil, our society will have embarked on a course of state-sponsored evil. When conscience is at work in an individual and that individual resists the tide of evil and challenges the assumptions of a society gone astray, that individual may play a critical role in restoring society’s damaged moral compass. If instead, that individual is hampered in his or her efforts to bring a moral perspective to a complex ethical problem, society is deprived of that wisdom, hardened in its commitment to immoral practices and subject to a misguided approach in its laws and practices.

The Liberals and their philosophically-aligned leftist allies in the House had no good sound arguments to put forth in the debate but offered illogical pablum like this mishmash from NDP member Murray Rankin: “We believe that coercion and intimidation are always wrong,” he said, before contradicting himself by opining that patients have a “constitutional right to avail themselves (sic) of medical assistance in dying.”

Of course, there is no constitutional right to “avail oneself of medical aid in dying,” but the Supreme Court justices invented an excuse, created a loophole, and Parliament did not have the courage (back in 2015) to use the Notwithstanding Clause to tell the judges that they were wrong. Now we have a law on “medical assistance in dying” and doctors are expected to participate — unless MP Anderson’s bill passes — to provide “medical assistance in killing.”

By requiring a doctor to perform or refer for assisted suicide, Mr. Rankin insists that we must use coercion and intimidation on doctors to get them to violate their consciences, something he says is “always wrong.” I’d like to ask Mr. Rankin, “How can it be right to do something that is ‘always wrong’?”

The debate will go on. If the collective conscience in the House of Commons were not already seared, this bill would pass in a heartbeat. If the current MPs were all men and women of conscience, this bill would not even have been necessary. However, since self-serving political pragmatism and crass partisan behaviour seem so prevalent, every MP will need to hear from his or her constituents about MP David Anderson’s important bill C-418 if there is any chance of getting them to honestly evaluate this bill. Please sign the online petition if you have not already done so. Please circulate it to your friends and please contact your MP, urging him or her to obey the promptings of conscience and support this bill. Without a conscience, our nation will slide further into a brutal anarchy.

For representation in Parliament that will protect life from conception to natural death, join CHP Canada. To bring about a CHP government, volunteer and support CHP Canada until we are represented in our Canadian Parliament.

Download PDF Version

Other Commentary by Rod Taylor: