It has often been said that the first casualty in war is truth. In the latest suicide bombing in the culture wars, Michael Ignatieff has lobbed an old hand grenade into Stephen Harper's nearby forces. As the old joke goes, it remains to be seen whether Mr. Harper will pull the pin and throw it back.

It began with the Prime Minister's announcement that his government would seek to improve health outcomes for women and children around the world. That's called "saying it without saying it." He did not specifically mention abortion (or "reproductive services," as the Ministry of Truth likes to call it). His comments raised red flags for many in the trenches who seek an end to Canada's decades-long war against the unborn, both at home and abroad.

It's true that the announcement deserved some footnotes or qualifiers. But for those on the left, a pause in the conversation is a great reason to start talking, even if they have nothing to say. Mr. Ignatieff waded in on the probability that Mr. Harper—contrary to all past statements and actual history of his behaviour in Parliament—was certainly planning an all-out offensive against abortion, and demanded that he specifically include access to abortion and contraception in his promise to aid impoverished women and children. (How the deliberate killing of children can be seen as coming to their defense he left up to the imagination of his audience. That audience being his Liberal caucus, they did not stumble over this inconsistency, but roared back their approval.)

The Liberals are running out of room on this one. To their immediate left, the NDP and the Bloc have already staked their claim. Their claim is the unequivocal demand that any baby can be killed in any womb, for any reason, at any time. Their claim is that a football player like Tim Tebow should not hug his mother on public television in support of a woman making a life-affirming choice (after all, there could be children watching!).

On the Liberal's other flank, the Tories have been quietly moving their lines. The uniforms—once clearly distinct on issues such as these—are now a pathetic blend. Camouflage is the colour of choice, and choice is the rhetoric of the day. When the party in power refuses to stay politely behind their lines, refuses to defend the unborn, refuses to own up to its supposed agenda, well, it's hard to know where to attack. The fact that Stephen Harper, in three separate campaigns, has advanced stealthily on the Liberal position and taken it has Mr. Ignatieff crying foul. Mr. Harper's assurances to the unquestioning public in 2008 that he would expect his cabinet ministers to vote AGAINST any legislation restricting abortion seems to have missed the Leader of the Opposition. Or perhaps he lives in wistful remembrance of the days when political leaders could be expected to speak clearly and forcefully about their convictions. If so, he needn't waste his ammo on the Prime Minister. He could end up in a "friendly fire" situation.

If Mr. Ignatieff wants to attack a political party committed to defending the unborn and supporting young women as they struggle to make choices they won't regret, he will have to get over his "Harper hang-up." He'll have to go after CHP Canada, the only morally and fiscally conservative party still on the field, the only party committed to defending innocent human life "from conception to natural death." Mr. Harper may be waiting to see which way the wind blows, but we in the CHP understand that it's never wrong to do what's right.

Now Mr. Harper and Mr. Ignatieff should get together and decide: who will be the leader of their new party? For all the rest of you, you can find our Better Solutions at