You are on page 1of 5

Answers to Some Questions

Question 1.) How can you affirm that it would be seriously sinful for a Catholic legislator to vote in favor of the proposed charter of rights presently before the House of Commons? Answer: If a charter of rights is made, and its wording does not include a clause specifically protecting the right to life of the unborn, then there is a danger that the courts will interpret the charter to mean that the unborn are not protected, and furthermore that any mother may legally kill, or procure the death of, her own child as long as it is in the womb. If such an interpretation were made possible (by the exclusion of a clause to protect the right to life of the unborn), then the State would be giving legal protection to mothers killing their children by abortion. If this danger exists by not now putting a clause in the proposed charter of rights specifically protecting the unborn, then the legislators have an obligation before God and before their fellow citizens and all mankind, to do their duty now by either defeating the charter of rights altogether from being passed, or by having a clause put into the charter of rights which protects the unborn from abortion. There is a further obligation for the lawmakers to act now, since there is a real possibility that, by not including in the charter of rights the specific protection of the unborn, that Abortion on Demand will be locked-in in a few years' time. The Members of Parliament and Senators of today will not be able to excuse themselves from guilt (if a charter is passed that does not protect the rights of the unborn) in a few years' time by saying, "We did not know that by passing this charter in 1981, we in effect locked into the Constitution abortion-on-demand by 1987" or whenever the Supreme Court of Canada follows the criminal example of the Supreme Court of the United States of January 22, 1973, which permitted millions of babies to be murdered, since the right to life of the unborn was not specified in the U.S.A. Charter of Rights. Since the danger is real, that the unborn may lose their rights and protection of the law by the passing of the charter, then a clause protecting their rights needs to be put into the charter now. In conclusion then, all Members of Parliament are under strict obligation no matter what party they belong to, to not vote for the Charter of Rights as long as it is without a clause protecting the unborn. It is especially important that all of us and especially the leaders and legislators of Canada be vigilant at this time. We have a situation where a Charter of Rights is about to be framed which is unjust toward the unborn. Unless one is attentive, it is not apparent what very serious consequences this Charter may well lead to. If we do not act now, it will be much more difficult to save ourselves later. For at the moment all it will take to make this Charter part of the Constitution is the passage of this Charter in the Parliament of Canada and the Parliament in England. For future changes it will take the passage in the Parliament of Canada plus seven or possibly even nine other parliaments - that is the Parliaments of

Page 1 of 5

seven or nine Canadian Provinces, in order to rectify any errors and defects of the present Charter. Of course the legislators in Britain are also under serious obligation before God not to pass the Charter if it does not have a clause specifically protecting the unborn from abortion. Then these Members of Parliament presently sitting, as well as the Senators, as well as each member of the House of Lords who, if they pass this Charter without the clause being added to protect the unborn, will have to answer for a lot of innocent blood on their hands before the tribunal of God, and even before the tribunals of men when finally just legislators and just judges are appointed. The Nazi executioners were not let off the hook by saying to the judges at Nuremburg: "We did not know; we were only following orders." In time, since innocent blood cries to Heaven for vengeance, the blood of the innocent will be vindicated by God. And whether it be through trial and judge that these lawmakers who are criminal (if they pass this legislation) are punished, or whether it be through other means, the Providence of God will hear and vindicate the blood of these innocent babies who are being murdered. But the obligation of all people, especially Members of Parliament and Senators, is to do all they can to prevent the establishment or even the danger of establishment into Canada's Constitution of the criminal negligence of not protecting the unborn. And let no one plead, "I did not know," or "I was under pressure", or "I can't impose my opinions on others." The Members of Parliament and Senators accepted the job, and so they have the responsibility and God will judge them for their own individual actions and lack of action, regarding the fulfilling of their obligations, or for being criminally negligent. The danger of leaving the unborn unprotected specifically by law and thereby opening the door to abortion-on-demand, is very real and very likely to take place, seeing how courts in the U.S.A., against all precedent, interpreted the Constitution contrary to all previous legislation by declaring that since it was not specified in writing in the U.S.A. Charter of Rights, therefore it ruled that the unborn did not have the right to protection by the State, and further the State could now pay for the killing of the unborn. There is a very real possibility that abortion-on-demand will be locked into the Constitution by not specifically protecting the unborn. Therefore all Members of Parliament and Senators have a strict obligation to either defeat the charter as it is proposed or else to amend the charter to specifically protect the unborn before passing the Charter. It is an obligation that all Members of Parliament have by the very fact that they are obliged to protect the innocent by their very office. Question 2.) Regarding the question: "How can you call abortion murder, because we don't know when the fertilized egg receives an immortal soul?" Answer: No one today would regard a fertilized egg in the womb of his mother to be anything but individual, separate and distinct from the mother who carries it. Biological science today confirms this beyond a shadow of a doubt. It is also certain that this individual being is human. It cannot be anything else, for do we find a rose growing on a fig tree? Or do horses generate rabbits? Neither then do humans generate anything but humans.

Page 2 of 5

Regarding the question as to when the immortal soul is joined to this individual human in his mother's womb, there may still be different views, but it is undeniable that God intends to infuse the human soul (if He has not already done so) into this incipient human life. And to snuff it out willfully is a crime against the Creator. It is also a crime against the human who has been killed. It is also certain moral teaching of Catholic theology that if someone is certain that there may possibly be someone alive in a certain place then he cannot act in such a way as to endanger the lives of the persons who might be there. One cannot follow a probable opinion, but one must rather take the safer course when it is a question of endangering someone's life, even though we are not certain that a person is so endangered. To not take the safer course, even though it may turn out later that no one was present, one still commits a mortal sin guilty of hellfire for not having taken the safer course. For example, one may not start rolling rocks down a hillside which could cause death to anyone who may be at the bottom even when one has an opinion that there probably is no one in the path of the rockslide. One must in this case take the safer course and not endanger the life of anyone who might be there. One could only start such a rockslide if one were certain that no one was there. So too one may not commit abortion on an opinion that says maybe the person in the womb has not yet got a human soul and therefore it is not murder. Because, like the example above, one cannot follow even a probable opinion in this matter, but one must take the safer course and not endanger the human life and the immortal soul of the baby in the womb. Furthermore, even if it ever became certain at some future time that the fertilized egg did not yet have an immortal soul during the first stage of its development, still abortion is a grave sin worthy of hellfire, since it is a serious crime against God the Creator who clearly intended to give this human being an immortal soul. So mothers and doctors and legislators are still under strict obligations by their very office, to protect the baby in the womb, from the first moment of conception until it is born, under pain of mortal sin. And those who procure abortions, including those who pay for them, at whatever stage of life of the baby in the womb, those same abortionists are excommunicated ipso facto. Answer to Question 3. In response to those who may affirm after reading all this (even though they may have some high office or university degree) still say that we Catholics or we Christians or we believers cannot impose our opinion or morality on others, we give the following answer: To see the fallacy of this argument for not protecting the unborn, let us transfer the argument by considering excluding from protection of the civil authorities, the Jews or members of the Liberal party, or simply anyone who dares to speak out against injustice, or anyone or any group simply who is unpopular. Then the charter of rights, then the law of the land, would read as follows: "All persons are prohibited by law from being killed except the following: Jews, and members of the Liberal party (or any individual or group considered undesirable by anyone else). How would Jews feel then? How would members of the Liberal party feel about this? Would they be secure if we told them that we really can't impose our morality on others who feel that all the evils in Canada are caused by the Jews or by the Liberals or by any group which is simply unpopular?

Page 3 of 5

Either we will not discriminate against the unborn, by giving them the full protection of the law and the enforcement of such laws by the civil authorities who are authorized to enforce the law, or we open the door to allowing any other group or individual to be butchered savagely by those who are more powerful. It is the beginning of the end of rule by law. It is the beginning of the end of civilization. It won't take very long, as history is measured, for complete anarchy and bloodshed and revolution to sweep our country. The hour is late. Let us wake up before it is too late. Answer to Question 4. The objection is raised that we live in a pluralistic society and it is against the principles of such a society to speak of God or morality or religion as this seems wrong and intolerant. We must either be for God or against Him. We must be for Jesus Christ or against Him. We must acknowledge Him before men or He will not acknowledge us before His Father, that is, for non-profession of our faith we would be guilty of hellfire. On Judgment Day we cannot plead our negligence toward God in this matter of protecting our defenseless brothers by saying that there were others in our society, a few or many, who did not believe in God or who did not believe in Jesus Christ, so we could not speak out lest we lose our wealth or position or honor through the evilness of other men. The Martyrs gave up their lives rather than deny Christ. What danger are we in now compared to theirs? But if we don't act now, then in a few years we may well be asked to formally deny Christ, to deny the existence of God, or forfeit our lives. Our Lady said that militant atheism would enslave the whole world if we did not heed Her requests. It will spread its errors throughout the whole world if we do not listen to Her in time. Already we see how far the militant atheists and the Secular Humanists, who are allies of the militant atheists, have succeeded. Little by little, God and our God-given rights have been excluded from being publicly recognized and protected within Canada, resulting in sixty-five thousand murders a year through abortion. In the U.S.A. one and a half million murders a year by abortion are the result of effectively excluding God from the public life of America. If we do not speak up and stand up and fight this creeping militant atheism in our midst now, it will become bolder and even more aggressive, and soon we shall ourselves become slaves of the atheistic tyrants. To answer the question simply then, either the militant atheists and the Secular Humanists will impose his morality, his beliefs, and his criminal injustices on us throughout Canada and the U.S.A., first by subverting our laws, institutions and customs, and when enough subversion has gone on, then, by force of arms through revolution and invasion, we will have their religion honoring Satan imposed upon us. Or else we will turn back to God and to Jesus Christ, the King of our society, and acknowledge Him publicly not only in our Churches but also throughout our cities, towns and villages, in our legislatures, courts and schools. We will acknowledge Him by public demonstrations of faith in our streets as well as in our family circles and in the privacy of our own rooms. Not only will we acknowledge Him with nice-sounding phrases, but effectively showing in our actions in the schools, courts, and governments, that we do as a nation give our full allegiance and loyalty above all to God our Creator and Jesus Christ our King and Savior. Either the militant atheists and the Secular Humanists will enslave us under the oppressive yoke of their supposed non-religion (which is really the forerunner of the large religion of Satan to be headed by his chosen one, the Antichrist) or we will bear the sweet yoke of Jesus Christ. There are only two bases on which to build a society. Either we build a

Page 4 of 5

society based on the love of God or else we build one on the love of mankind excluding God, this latter being idolatry of self and it puts us into bondage to Satan. St. Augustine, in the City of God, which he wrote long ago, shows us this, and the same is still true today. It is up to us. Either you will be for Jesus Christ or against Him. You cannot sit on the fence. As Jesus said: "He who is not with Me is against Me, and he who does not gather with me scatters." (Matt. 12:30). We will be one country under God, or we will deny God in practice if not in theory, by our laws which are so negligent in their wording as to discriminate against the unborn. Will we say to Pilate today, as the democratic crowd did of old, "We have no king but Caesar."? Will we say, in effect, that we only acknowledge civil authority, but we do not acknowledge that civil authority comes from God and is answerable to Him. What we would be saying if we do not acknowledge Christ the King openly, is that we prefer to have the manipulators of public opinion, rather than God, rule over us.

A Final Word
We pray and hope that priests and bishops will continue to speak out clearly about the duty of citizens and the duty of lawmakers, and the duty of doctors, especially those who vote on committees at hospitals, to not allow one abortion. We pray that it will be clearly understood by all that to not do their duty in this matter, no matter what pressure is applied to them, to vote in favor of this crime in general or in specific instances, is a mortal sin and worthy of hellfire, even though they themselves may not be the ones to apply the knife to put to death the babies. But should other leaders be found to quiet the consciences of those who may be uneasy and begin to fear for their salvation, let all concerned know that the judgment of God will still be executed upon them if they do not effectively change. And to the excuse that those legislators may offer to God, that some educated people or even some clergymen reassured us that we could vote in favor of not protecting the unborn, will not God answer that those clergy were blind and leaders of the blind and both of you will fall into the pit? We pray God that no such persons among the clergy be found in Canada today. "Be gone from Me, accursed to eternal fire," are indeed terrifying words to hear from God. To those who would say to God on Judgment Day, "But we believed some clergy who told us that we could vote this way." Will not God answer, "I warned you that scandals would come and woe to the world because of them, but you are still guilty because you did not inform your conscience according to the teaching of My Church, but chose to follow the false opinions of bad clergy. You knew where to find the teaching of My Church, but you chose to remain ignorant. When someone brought this to your attention, did you not choose not to examine it lest you might be obliged to follow what I teach?" Will He not then say, "You have been willfully blind and there are none so blind as those who will not see. Be gone from Me into eternal fire." Pray then, especially the Rosary, that this error will be seen for what it is. Pray before it is too late.

Page 5 of 5