CBC Facebook Wish List & the Anglican position on abortion

CBC recently ran a rather unscientific poll through Facebook.  It was billed as the Great Canadian Wish List, asking Canadians to vote for their number one wish for the nation.  The variety of wishes is quite interesting, have a look at the top vote-getters.

Surprisingly (to me at least), the wish list poll turned into a bit of a contest between opposing sides on the [insert favourite term here] abortion issue.  Perhaps that has to do with the extent of networking in which those "groups" engage - making them prime for a facebook setting. 

From what I can tell, it has been almost 20 years since the the Anglican Church of Canada issued statements on the question of abortion. 

Friday November 3, 1989

12:00 noon

ANGLICAN CHURCH AFFIRMS ITS POSITION ON ABORTION

In the light of the Government's announcement of a new Abortion Bill, the Anglican Church reaffirms its position that both the rights and needs of women, and the rights and needs of the unborn, require protection.

The Church welcomes a non-gestational approach. This accords with the Church's opposition to any arbitrary division which would make early abortion available on demand. The Church's fundamental position is that "abortion is always the taking of a human life and, in our view, should never be done except for serious therapeutic reasons." However, the Church's Abortion Report affirms that:

*an upper limit should be established at which "there is no reasonable prospect of viability";
*there should be a waiting period during which time counselling to women should be made available;
*other alternatives to abortion explored including "social and financial supports to meet the needs of the woman, in housing accommodation, child care, employment, retraining, welfare benefits, and income support, as well as consideration of adoption of the baby expected."

The Church further affirms that there should be a conscience clause, so that "the conscientious right of health care personnel to refrain from participating in abortion procedures be guaranteed."
The Church also is "opposed in principle" to "anticipate genetic defect in the foetus as automatic grounds for abortion," because as Christians we are "called to be the voice of the voiceless and powerless (and) must speak out when those different from or less able than the norm are to be denied the full rights accorded their fellow humans."

The Church's Abortion Report also recommends legislation to "ban commercial transactions in human genetic material;" or any possibility of deliberate abortion for purposes of "foetal cell farming" for human transplants, and welcomes the recent announcement of a Royal Commission on reproductive techniques "as a vehicle to examine these concerns and develop legislative measures."

The Anglican Church sees abortion as a public justice issue, challenging Canadians to build a society that affirms human life, which values children and welcomes a new generation, and which provides legal and social protection for women caught in the trauma of problem pregnancies. Such extensive social legislation, to reduce conditions which make the choice of abortion more likely, would include:

*programs and education to combat violence against women
  more affordable housing
*pay equity for women
*a guaranteed annual income, and other financial measures
*universally accessible, publicly funded day care
*an intensified national program to collect child support payments from delinquent fathers
*better educational programs about sexuality and contraception in schools

The Church does not see abortion as simply a "women's issue" but rather a community issue, which takes place on the battleground of women's bodies. Concerned that women are frequently forced to choose between marginalization and poverty or abortion, the Church believes that in many circumstances women are not "free" to choose to bear their children and so, because society fails to provide supportive structures, "abortion has become a means of 'restructuring the woman' by emptying the womb." Many Canadian women who choose not to bear their child make their decision out of alienation and hopelessness. "True choice must involve alternatives to despair" the Report concludes.

With the advent of more prevalent genetic screening, and ensuing abortions based on genetics, groups like the Canadian Down Syndrome Society have been wary of some of the directions our society is taking.

Somewhere in the back of my mind I have a question about whether or not our church is really interested in being "inclusive".  Some people don't get to be blessed.

Some people don't get to be born.

Comments

[Scott Gilbreath]

Thanks for this blast from the past, Joe. The statement's support for all human lives is commendable but that is compromised by fudge elsewhere, e.g., countenancing legal abortion below some "upper limit" to gestation. Also, the statement's emphasis on social programmes while completely ignoring the personal responsibilities of expectant mothers and fathers directly involved is very troubling. Governments (i.e., taxpayers) should provide programmes to help the less fortunate but, as the experience of the past 20 years indicates, public spending with no expectation of accountability solves little and often exacerbates problems.

Still, the 1989 statement is vastly superior to the church's subsequent social policy positions.

I note with some dark amusement (forgive me) the opening reference to "the Government's announcement of a new Abortion Bill". The bill passed the House under Conservative PM Brian Mulroney, but died in the Liberal-dominated Senate on a tie vote after an acrimonious public debate. The Conservative government then and there swore never to attempt to legislate on abortion again. Every government since has abided by that pledge, making Canada unique among Western democracies, if not the entire world, in having no abortion law whatever.

[Donald McKenzie]

Perhaps this is merely reflective of a "missio Homo" attitude that seems all too prevalent in the church today. The Church increasingly seems to look to the world around it to shape its ideals and commitments. While there are a whole host of difficulties that come with this, one of the most troubling and troublesome is the tendency for the church to get caught up in social fads (usually 10 years too late). When the fads wear off, the deeper issues that they have grown up around still remain, untouched by the gospel.

Coupled with that is the fact that there seems to be a desire to have issues dealt with in a neat and tidy fashion. This editorial from the most recent issue of the Anglican Journal seems to describe this phenomenon quite well. http://www.anglicanjournal.com/issues/2007/133/junejuly/06/article/synod-issues-end-in-a-question-mark-not-a-period. We want neat and easy answers so that we can move on to the next item on the calendar.

In the case of abortion, the fact that until recently there have not been any significant legislative challenges means that it has been pushed to the back burner. So there are no more clinic blockades and protest marches to draw the attention of a media looking for its latest daily sound bite. While there are organizations dedicating to continuing the process of questioning the validity of the practice, the larger church bodies as a whole have tended to neglect it.

Perhaps we need to think about such issues in the context of our liturgical practices. Perhaps the Feast of the Annunciation would make a good starting place for reflection, or maybe the Feast of the Holy Innocents. The BCP, written in the days when death in childbirth was a common occurrence has a rite for the "thanksgiving after child-birth." Maybe we need new rites that can be used for the celebration of a pregnancy or for the gift of life within the womb. I realize that these could be fraught with danger on an emotional level if something goes wrong later on in the pregnancy, but we have very little now in the way of offering hope and support prior to the child’s birth. These are just a few random thoughts, hopefully somebody will have some better and more useful ideas.

[Stephanie]

I'm sad to say that I can't imagine our present national governing bodies saying something even as (sorta-)strong as this now. I think your insights on "inclusion" are good ones; it's starting to look more and more like a false front for all sorts of ....

[Mrs. Falstaff]

You know, I saw a little boy with downs at the park the other day - he looked to be about four. He was having a grand old time with his big brother. I was surprised by the child though, and after a few seconds I realized why. I think it's been at least five or six years since I've seen a child with down's syndrome. There are lots of young adults around town, but very very few children - I think you are right. Many of them don't get to be born.