Parliament voted to allow sex-selection abortions in Canada yesterday, voting down a proposed law which would have enabled Canada to join the league of civilized nations, and become a more, well, science-based, logical, and compassionate nation, founded, as our Constitution says, “upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law.”

So this ensures we continue to have no law, and no recognition of God. And no principles. And if history is our guide, this will not end well.

In case you didn’t already know this, abortion is the most disgraceful, most egregious, most thoroughly disgusting thing ever thought of by humans. I think you do know that. Nonetheless, because Canada is, uniquely, without any abortion laws, and because any woman of any age can get an abortion at any time in her pregnancy up to and including the very end, for any reason or no reason at all, all paid for by the enabling and encouraging government, 70,000 to 100,000 abortions are done every year in Canada. Most of the killed are, apparently, girls. MPs are now on the historic record indicating they would like that to continue apace.

I think history will treat those MPs very badly.

The selective aborting of girls is also what we in the civilized world call “eugenics.” I think future activists and intellectuals and though-leaders might also apply other horrid terms to accurately describe “what they did back then.”

And I have an extremely difficult time grappling with the women and feminist men out there who insist on calling sex-selective abortions a “woman’s health” issue. Or “reproductive health.” This just exemplifies the lie that these people are perpetrating. It betrays their moral vacancy.

Justin Trudeau says he is not personally pro-choice, and that he only thinks Canada should be. Or something. (Of course he also says he is a pro-woman feminist, and all that, so…)

The grand feminist political leader, Trudeau, naturally (if you will forgive my use of that term) joined in voting to allow the selective abortion of females yesterday.

Every single Liberal MP including Justin Trudeau just essentially voted in favor of eugenics. And a third of the “conservatives” in the Conservative Party did too. Including the leader, Erin O’Toole, who is pro-choice —so extreme, in fact, that this “principle” of his is maintained even in the cases of killing girls only, i.e., eugenics. So he is truly all-in. But at least he “allows” his members to vote their own conscience on these matters. Two-thirds  of them thus voted for the law proposed yesterday. Good on them.

Trudeau, for his part, insists that every Liberal member who runs in an election under the Liberal banner be pro-choice — or pro “women’s health” or whatever they call it to fake you out. No Liberal MP can be pro-life in Trudeau/Liberal-land. It is literally forbidden under Justin Trudeau’s leadership. So they all voted the law down yesterday like good little boys, and girls. Mmmmbut Trudeau is pro-life himself, see. Personally, you see, he’s a Catholic.

    • “For someone to start questioning my own faith and accusing me of being a bad Catholic, is something that I really take issue with. My own personal faith is an extremely important part of who I am and the values that I try to lead with.” — https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/justin-trudeau-upset-tory-mp-questioned-his-faith-1.1017541
    • “Trusting in God’s plan. For someone as rational and scientific and logical and rigorous as I am, to accept the unknowable and to re-anchor myself in faith was really, really important to me.” — https://ottawacitizen.com/news/politics/trudeau-goes-public-with-personal-aspects-of-his-life-in-new-memoir
    • “Since that moment, I still consider myself and have re-found myself of a deep faith and belief in God.” — https://ottawacitizen.com/news/politics/trudeau-goes-public-with-personal-aspects-of-his-life-in-new-memoir

Like so many things that pass through Trudeau’s rarified air, “God” is useful in some areas, but not so much in others. “Law” — same thing. “Principle” — yeah the same. Science, logic — the Constitution — area all just tools to be deployed when expedient, or when it might enhance his own personal satisfaction.

A commenter on the online newspaper story about this, named Graham French, said it extremely well:

In a time when statues are removed and schools are having their names changed because people of the past didn’t live up to present day values, we should ask ourselves, will people of the future condemn us for what we do today? The answer, of course, is yes. And it won’t be for the way we treat animals. It won’t be for the way we treat the environment. It definitely won’t be for failing to reach gender equality or for institutional racism. It will be because we allow and institute abortion. This will be the crime that will be inexplicable to people of the future. Here we sit with more wealth and less children per person than almost any other society in history, and we defend the act of destroying the unborn for any convenience whatsoever. It will define us and it will horrify our descendants. And they will be right.

Joel Johannesen
Follow Joel
Latest posts by Joel Johannesen (see all)