Right to Life New Zealand

Upholding the sanctity of life in New Zealand and Standing Against the Killing

Is Jacinda Ardern Serious about Reducing Child Abuse?

by Leave a Comment

Media Release 19 October 2019

Abortion is the ultimate in child abuse! Why does the Prime Minister refuse to acknowledge that the violent dismemberment of a defenceless and innocent child in the womb is child abuse -in fact the ultimate child abuse. It is appalling that she calls it “Health Care”.
The Prime Minister has stated that she has a passionate desire to reduce child abuse in New Zealand. In May 2019 in response to the Stuff Homicide Report she said, that New Zealand’s record of family violence is ” horrific and “shocking” and that addressing the issue is one of the governments priorities.

If this is a priority Prime Minister, why then are you promoting the Abortion Legislation Bill which decriminalises the abuse and killing of children and makes the murder of innocent and defenceless children “a reproductive choice for women” and a ‘health service’. New Zealand is one of the most dangerous places in the world to be a child. This bill will increase child abuse in New Zealand and make New Zealand a more violent society.

It is an appalling injustice that the government applauds this child abuse of the unborn by having the abortionists who engage in the killing of thousands of defenceless unborn awarded with a knighthood for “services to women.”

Right to Life fully supports the Prime Minister in her resolve to stop child abuse in New Zealand which has one of the highest rates of child abuse in the OECD, but why is it that the government refuses to acknowledge that child abuse begins in the womb? How can the government say that you may not abuse your child after birth but you may kill the child before it is born? Why is it a crime to smack a child while at the same time the Prime Minister promotes the Abortion Legislation bill, which allows for the violent dismemberment of a child in the womb   The Prime Minister is rightly concerned that 204 children up to the age of 14  were killed after birth since 1992. Why is she not also concerned at the more than 520,000  children violently killed before birth since 1978: they are also our children. We will not reduce our child abuse in this country until we acknowledge that abortion is violence and the ultimate in child abuse.

It is understandable that if we violate our prohibition against violence against the unborn the weakest and most defenceless members of the human family, it will weaken our prohibition of inflicting violence against the born child.

New Zealanders are deeply ashamed of our child abuse record, it is a terrible burden on the conscience of the nation. As a society we experience no difficulty in recognising child abuse and responding with horror, sorrow, grief and a determination to stop the abuse of the innocent and defenceless children. Why is it then that as a nation which is implacably opposed to child abuse we allow each day in this country the equivalent of two classrooms of children to be violently dismembered and killed in abortions in our Hospitals’ sanctioned and funded by the government? It is also violence against the mother. The government has institutionalised child abuse.

We all have a duty to defend life; it is always wrong to kill the innocent. As a nation we are suffering from a crippling and destructive  blindness, a refusal to acknowledge the truth that we have a duty to protect the lives of all children, born and unborn, they are all members of our human family and God’s precious children. Right to Life pleads with Parliament to act to protect all of our children born and unborn by defeating the Prime Minister’s abortion bill.

Ken Orr
Spokesperson,
Right to Life

Abortion Bill Legislation Committee Refusing to hear 95% of Submitters

by Leave a Comment

Media Release 10th October 2019

Right to Life believes that the Special Abortion Legislation Committee is violating the right of citizens to be heard and undermining our Parliamentary democracy.

The Committee has advised that there were more than 23,000 written submissions made to the Select Committee and that  2890 submitters made a request to have the opportunity to make an oral submission. It is believed that only 150 submitters have been granted the privilege to be heard, only 5% of that total. This is totally unacceptable in a democracy.

Hon Ruth Dyson said: “The committee welcomes hearing from a wide range of people on their views. We understand that this is a sensitive and important topic, and we look forward to engaging in a respectful and open discussion.”

Right to Life is aware that this is a special committee created by the Minister of Justice, the Hon Andrew Little for the exclusive purpose of considering this bill and submissions. This Committee has no other business and should has stated devote itself to hearing from a wide range of people on their views and engaging in a respectful and open discussion.

Those who govern should not forget that they govern with the consent of the governed. We the governed have an absolute right to be heard. This is a bill like no other in the history of our nation. It is a bill that if passed will allow hundreds of thousands of children yet to be conceived to be violently killed as “a reproductive choice for women.” It is a bill that will increase the victimisation, suffering and abandonment of women.

This bill seeks:-

  • To remove the protection of the State under the Crimes Act for women from the violence of abortion.
  • To remove the protection of the Crimes Act for the life of unborn children, so that it is no longer a crime to kill an unborn child.
  • To allow for the killing of the unborn child up to 20 weeks for any reason at the request of the mother.
  • To allow for the killing of the child up to birth at the request of the mother if a doctor considers it appropriate.

The community should be concerned and alarmed that the Minister of Justice wants this committee to act with urgency in reporting this contentious bill back to Parliament in order that it can be rushed through Parliament and passed into law before the 19 December 2019 the last sitting day for this year.

Statesman are concerned about the next generation but politicians are concerned about the next election. Next year is an election year and the government does not want to lose the support of many in the community who are passionately pro-life and opposed to this anti -life and anti-feminist bill.

There is no urgency to pass this bill. There is however urgency for the Committee to ensure that every citizen who wants to be heard, both those for and against, before the bill is reported back to Parliament by 8th February 2020.

Ken Orr,
Spokesperson,
Right to Life

Jacinda Ardern has lost the trust of the nation

by 2 Comments

“Our success as leaders should be judged on no lesser standard than the well-being of children.” Jacina Ardern

Media Release 28th September 2019

Right to Life with deep regret believes that our appointed leader Jacinda Ardern has forfeited her right to the trust of the people of New Zealand and her right to lead this nation. Those who govern do so with the permission of the governed. We the citizens of this nation have an inalienable right to demand that our leaders act with integrity and moral rectitude.

Jacinda Ardern pledged to provide openness and accountability in government and had it enshrined in the coalition agreement. Why then is she refusing to answer questions on statements she has made in public?

The first duty of our Prime Minister is to uphold the inalienable right to life of every member of our community from conception to natural death and not to preside over our destruction. In this she has failed.

Right to Life agrees with the Prime Minister when she said on 24 September 2018, “Our success as leaders should be judged on no lesser standard than the well-being of children.”

Jacinda Ardern has betrayed the disability community. In 2017 she made a promise to the disability community in response to concerns expressed by the Saving Down’s advocacy group that the new abortion bill would remove the current 20 week prohibition and allow abortions up to birth for foetal abnormality. The Prime Minister responded, “They have said till 40 weeks, which is wrong, which is wrong. We have time periods already set out in law, I am not proposing changes to that. I am proposing it comes out of the Crimes Act.”

Right to Life asks the Prime Minister why she has directed that the Abortion Legislation Bill allow for the killing up to birth, of children who may have a disability, including Down syndrome? The current abortion legislation under the Crimes Act allows for the killing of a child before birth up to 20 weeks “where there is a substantial risk that the child, if born, would be so physically or mentally subnormal as to be seriously handicapped.” Down syndrome is considered a mild to moderate disability and Right to Life therefore protests at the killing of any of these special children who are gift to the community.

The Down syndrome community are the most persecuted community in New Zealand. According to information provided by the Minister of Health under the Official Information Act, in 2017 there were only 47 children born with Down syndrome.  It is estimated that there were 56 babies with Down syndrome who were killed before birth in 2017. Between 2009 and 2017 it is estimated that 694 children with Down syndrome were killed before birth in abortions in New Zealand.

Right to Life wrote to the Prime Minister on 26 August and asked the following questions;

  • Why the Abortion Legislation Bill does not conform to the public assurance made by you to prohibit abortions after 20 weeks for foetal abnormality?
  • Do you agree that with the statement of the Minister of Justice, Andrew Little, “I reject the notion that abortion entailed killing another human being and I accept on legal and on moral grounds that human rights do not accrue until human life is possible?”

The Prime Minister refused to answer and had her Correspondence Manager write to us on 3 September to say,”Thank you for writing to Jacinda, the matters that you raise have been noted.” Her response is deplorable and unacceptable.

The Prime Minister has failed the unborn children of New Zealand. Right to Life believes that Andrew Little’s appalling statement was made with the approval of the Prime Minister. We also contend that she believes that abortion does not kill a human being and that human rights do not assure until the baby is born. In holding this untenable and unjust position she has betrayed future generations of our children and their mothers. Her ardent promotion of her Abortion Legislation Bill is anti-life and anti-feminists.

Never before has New Zealand had a Prime Minister who is so antagonistic to women and their unborn.

Ken Orr
Spokesperson,
Right to Life

Is Jacinda Ardern heading a Dictatorship or a Democracy?

by Leave a Comment

Right to Life has been advised by a reliable source that the Prime Minister and the Minister of Justice abused their authority and used their power to exert pressure on a number of Labour MPs to vote in support of the Abortion Legislation Bill at its first reading on 8th August. The Prime Minister gave an assurance on the TV 1 Breakfast programme on 6th August two days before the vote that it would be a conscience issue and that she did not know how Labour MPs would vote.

Right to Life believes that for our Prime Minister to exert pressure like this is indicative that we are living in a dictatorship and her actions are an affront to our Parliamentary democracy.

Right to Life also considers that It is simply unbelievable that she and the Minister of Justice did not know how her MP’s were going to vote.  We believe that she knew after intense lobbying exactly how many of her caucus were going to vote for this contentious anti-life bill.

Right to Life asks why the Parliamentary Press gallery who have the duty to be the watchdog for the community have remained silent?

The vote was 94 to 23. A total of 42 Labour MPs dutifully voted for the Bill, while to provide a semblance of democracy Right to Life believes that a mere four courageous MPs were permitted to break ranks and vote against the Bill. This anti-life bill  emanates from a violent culture of death, it does not compromise, it allows no opposition and destroys all in its path.

There are 17 list MPs in the Labour caucus, 16 MPs voted for the Bill and Right to Life believes that only one brave list MP was permitted to vote against the Bill.

Right to Life is passionate in  defending the right of our Parliamentarians to exercise their God given conscience in voting. It is absolutely critical for our Parliamentary democracy that Members of Parliament are not subject to coercion to subject their conscience either from outside Parliament or from those who exercise power within caucus.

List members are particularly prone to coercion from those who have power and authority within government or caucus to demand that their MPs vote as instructed, lest their names be taken off the list for the next election.

Right to Life requests that the Prime Minister give the nation a categorical assurance that Labour MPs will be allowed an absolutely free conscience vote at the second reading of the Abortion Legislation Bill.

Ken Orr
Spokesperson,
Right to Life

More lives would be lost, ruined

by 1 Comment

Catherine Gillies

The following article is a guest post by Catherine Gillies.

As a post-abortion counsellor having helped facilitate the healing of many suicidal women and desperate men, I think it’s horrendous that this cruel, uncompassionate and poorly researched abortion legislation is being promoted.
For over 35 years I have heard stories of heart-break – many women are incapacitated by PTSD, or other debilitating conditions. Most women felt they had been vulnerable when they discovered their pregnancy and had no other choice but abortion. They certainly never gave informed consent!

I now work with children and grandchildren of post-abortive women. The long-term impact of that vulnerable “unchoice” is intergenerational trauma, as the living children suffer the consequences of the wounded mother’s unresolved grief for their lost children. I’ve seen mothers grieve a five-week foetus as they would a five-year-old child.

Most major international studies, and importantly, New Zealand studies, indicate abortion has detrimental long-term impacts on a woman’s mental and physical health. There is a great deal of evidence that it also impacts men severely.

The stories I hear of medical sloppiness and women being coerced and lied to about needing to make an immediate decision, whether they discover their pregnancy at five or 15 weeks gestation, are frustrating. Many are shocked to learn the legal time limit in New Zealand has been 20 weeks for the past 40 years.

Removing abortion from the Crimes Act will increase the bullying that already happens within our taxpayer-funded abortion services.

Let’s not lose sight that abortion is a multimillion-dollar business in New Zealand. It is not in the interests of the abortion industry to have informed consent, good pre-abortion counselling, or restrictions or safeguards in their businesses. Removing abortion from The Crimes Act is likely to lead to even more bullying and coercion, more heartache, and lives lost and ruined.

Studies all over the world show that women who have a history of neglect or abuse are far more likely to have abortions, as they do not have the emotional strength to listen to their own desires; they are vulnerable to bullying and coercion. The abortion makes an already vulnerable person hugely weaker, physically and psychologically.

There is a significant social cost of abortion. As a taxpayer, I am concerned how our tax dollars are spent. When taking into account the long-term detrimental impact of abortion, it is potentially the most expensive procedure on which the government spends our health budget. It is the tax system that deals with the long-term impacts.

Evidence shows there is a correlation between abortion and:

* Future mental health problems

* Increased physical health problems

* Increased rates of suicide

* Increased risk of death by homicide

* Higher rates of addictions

* Incarceration rates

* Relationship and family break down

As families and communities we can offer better solutions to vulnerable pregnancies than abortion!

Two Letters to two Leaders on Abortion

by Leave a Comment

26 August 2019

Hon Andrew Little MP

Minister of Justice,

Dear Minister,

Abortion Legislation Bill

Right to Life is concerned that you refuse to believe that abortion kills a human being. In introducing the Abortion Legislation Bill to Parliament on the 8th August you said;

“I reject the notion that abortion entailed killing another human being and I accept on legal and on moral grounds that human rights do not accrue until human life is possible.”

Never before in the history of the New Zealand Parliament has a Minister of Justice stood up in Parliament and declared that the unborn child is not a human being and has no human rights and that it can be killed because it is not human.

Why are you rejecting the findings of the Royal Commission on Contraception Sterilisation and Abortion appointed by the third Labour government that reported to Parliament in 1977 which stated, upholding the status of the unborn child. “The unborn child, as one of the weakest, the most vulnerable and most defenceless forms of humanity, should receive protection. From a biological point of view there is no argument as to when life begins.” It begins at conception.

Your statement  rejects the humanity of the unborn child and that it is a member of the human family. It denies that the child is the bearer of human rights, the foundation right being an inalienable right to life. A human being does not become a person at a particular stage of development following fertilization. It follows that a human person is in continuous development of potentialities and a human being has been a person since he or she began to exist at fertilization.

Right to Life questions your claim that your opinion is supported by law and morality. The long title of the Contraception Sterilisation and Abortion Act states …” abortions may be authorised only after full regard to the rights of the unborn child.” The Crimes Act section 182 which protects the right of the child to be born is titled, “Killing unborn child. If it is a child it is a human being. His statement violates the New Zealand Bill of Rights, which states, section 8. “Right not to be deprived of life.”

No one shall be deprived of life except on such grounds as are established by law and are consistent with the principles of fundamental justice. United Nations Declaration of Human Rights which affirms in Article 3, “Everyone has a right to life, liberty, and security of person.” It also violates the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child which states in its preamble, “The child, by reason of his physical and mental immaturity, needs special safeguards and care, including appropriate legal protection, before as well as after birth.” Why are you ignoring the rights of the unborn child recognised by these laws and Conventions?

Your statement in presenting the Abortion Legislation Bill raises several very important questions. I would be grateful if you would kindly respond to the following questions.

•         You state that human rights do not accrue until human life is possible. It is acknowledged that the Crimes Act section 159 states that an unborn child does not become a human being until it is born but this is only for the purpose of the Act to differentiate between homicide and the killing of an unborn child. The World Health Organisation, the medical profession and the Royal Commission on Contraception Sterilisation and Abortion concur that human life begins at conception. Why do you then believe that human life begins at birth?

•         You state that, “on moral grounds that human rights do not accrue until human life is possible.” Christian morality recognises that an unborn child has an inalienable right to life that has been endowed on the child at conception by the Creator. Christian morality defends the right to life of the unborn. It upholds the fifth commandment, “Thou shalt not kill.” What moral code then do you support that proposes that human rights are not conferred until birth?

Thank you for all that you are doing to promote the common good.

Yours sincerely

Ken Orr

Secretary

26 August 2019.

Rt. Hon. Jacinda Ardern,

Prime Minister,

Parliament Building,

Wellington.

Dear Prime Minister,

Thank you for all that you are doing to reduce child poverty and child abuse in New Zealand.

In 2017 you made a promise to the disability community in response to concerns expressed by the Saving Down’s advocacy group that the new abortion bill would remove the current 20 week prohibition and allow abortions up to birth for foetal abnormality. On Newstalk breakfast programme on 11 September 2018 you stated in response, “They have said till 40 weeks, which is wrong, which is wrong. We have time periods already set out in law, I am not proposing changes to that. I am proposing it comes out of the Crimes Act.”

It is noted with great concern that the Abortion Legislation Bill presented by the Minister of Justice on 8 August 2019 excludes the current  time limit of 20 weeks prohibiting the killing of the unborn diagnosed with a grievous disability. Your government Bill contrary to the assurance that you previously publicly made allows for abortion up to birth for the unborn with Down syndrome or another disability.

I am greatly concerned that your government is encouraging the killing of the unborn who are deemed to have Down syndrome, a mild to moderate disability. Information provided by the Minister of Health under the Official Information Act reveals that in 2017 there were fifty-six babies with Down syndrome killed in an abortion before birth and an estimated forty-seven babies with Down syndrome born. The average annual abortion rate in New Zealand since 2009 for children with Down syndrome is sixty-two per cent.

It is also a matter of great concern that the Minister of Justice refuses to believe that abortion kills a human being. The Minister, in introducing the Abortion Legislation Bill to Parliament on the 8th August said; “I reject the notion that abortion entailed killing another human being and I accept on legal and on moral grounds that human rights do not accrue until human life is possible.”

Never before in the history of the New Zealand Parliament has a Minister of Justice stood up in Parliament and declared that the unborn child is not a human being and has no human rights and that it can be killed because it is not human.

Why is the Minister rejecting the findings of the Royal Commission on Contraception Sterilisation and Abortion appointed by the third Labour government that reported to Parliament in 1977 which stated, upholding the status of the unborn child. “The unborn child, as one of the weakest, the most vulnerable and most defenceless forms of humanity, should receive protection. From a biological point of view there is no argument as to when life begins.” It begins at conception.

I would be grateful if you would kindly advise me;

•         Do you agree that with the statement of the Minister of Justice, Andrew Little, “I reject the notion that abortion entailed killing another human being and I accept on legal and on moral grounds that human rights do not accrue until human life is possible?”

Why the Abortion Legislation Bill does not conform to the public assurance made by you to prohibit abortions after 20 weeks for fetal abnormality?

•         Do you agree with the findings of the Royal Commission appointed by the third Labour government concerning when human life begins and the need to protect the unborn child?

Thank you for all that you are doing to promote the common good.

Yours sincerely,

Ken Orr

Secretary

Why Has Jacinda Ardern Betrayed The Disability Sector?

by Leave a Comment

More than half of the unborn children in New Zealand with Down syndrome are killed before they are born. This is a violation of their human rights and a crime against humanity.

Right to Life believes that this is state sponsored genocide, disguised as health care, against a clearly defined group within our community.

Can the Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern, be trusted?  In 2017 she made a promise to the disability community in response to concerns expressed by the Saving Down’s advocacy group that the new abortion bill would remove the current 20 week prohibition and allow abortions up to birth for foetal abnormality. The Prime Minister responded, “They have said till 40 weeks, which is wrong, which is wrong. We have time periods already set out in law, I am not proposing changes to that. I am proposing it comes out of the Crimes Act.”

Right to Life asks the Prime Minister why she has directed that the Abortion Legislation Bill allow for the killing up to birth of children before birth who may have a disability, including Down syndrome? The current abortion legislation under the Crimes Act allows for the killing of a child before birth up to 20 weeks “where there is a substantial risk that the child, if born, would be so physically or mentally subnormal as to be seriously handicapped.” Down syndrome is considered a mild to moderate disability and Right to Life therefore protests at the killing of any of these special children who are gift to the community.  

The Down syndrome community are the most persecuted community in New Zealand. According to information provided by the Minister of Health under the Official Information Act. In 2017 there were only 47 children born with Down syndrome.  It is estimated that there were 56 babies with Down syndrome who were killed before birth in 2017. Between 2009 and 2017 it is estimated that 694 children with Down syndrome were killed before birth in abortions in New Zealand. 

There is an international campaign to eliminate Down syndrome by killing these children before they are born. In Europe many countries have an abortion rate for Down syndrome of 90%, in Iceland it is nearly 100%.

Government funded screening for Down syndrome and other disabilities is offered to all pregnant women in New Zealand. Right to Life believes that this screening is a search and destroy mission that promotes the belief that only the perfect have a right to life. Those women whose screening reveals a high risk of a baby with Down syndrome are offered an abortion by the government and encouraged to terminate the life of their child. This would contribute to the average annual abortion rate of 62% for Down syndrome.

The Abortion Legislation Bill driven by the Prime Minister holds that abortion does not kill an unborn child and that the child has no rights until it is born. The Prime Minister would therefore logically believe that a child with Down syndrome is not a human being and has no right to life. Right to Life asks her then: Is it your objective to encourage the extermination of children with Down syndrome in New Zealand through their violent termination up to birth?

Why are the Churches and the media silent?

Ken Orr

Spokesperson,

Right to Life

Does Abortion Kill a Human Being?

by 2 Comments

Media Release 17 August 2019

Right to Life is concerned that the Minister of Justice refuses to believe that abortion kills a human being. The Minister, in introducing the Abortion Legislation Bill to Parliament on the 8th August said;

“I reject the notion that abortion entailed killing another human being and I accept on legal and on moral grounds that human rights do not accrue until human life is possible.”

Never before in the history of the New Zealand Parliament has a Minister of Justice stood up in Parliament and declared that the unborn child is not a human being and has no human rights and that it can be killed because it is not human. The objective of this declaration was to remove a major objection to the Minister’s intention to facilitate the killing of the unborn under the guise of health care.

Why is the Minister rejecting the findings of the Royal Commission on Contraception Sterilisation and Abortion appointed by the third Labour government that reported to Parliament in 1977 which stated, upholding the status of the unborn child. “The unborn child, as one of the weakest, the most vulnerable and most defenceless forms of humanity, should receive protection. From a biological point of view there is no argument as to when life begins.” It begins at conception.

This is an appalling statement that rejects the humanity of the unborn child and that it is a member of the human family. It denies that the child is the bearer of human rights, the foundation right being an inalienable right to life.

Right to Life challenges the Ministers claim that his opinion is supported by law and morality. The long title of the Contraception Sterilisation and Abortion Act states …” abortions may be authorised only after full regard to the rights of the unborn child.” The Crimes Act section 182 which protects the right of the child to be born is titled, “Killing unborn child. If it is a child it is a human being. His statement violates the New Zealand Bill of Rights, which states, section 8. “Right not to be deprived of life.”

No one shall be deprived of life except on such grounds as are established by law and are consistent with the principles of fundamental justice. United Nations Declaration of Human Rights which affirms in Article 3, “Everyone has a right to life, liberty, and security of person.” It also violates the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child which states in its preamble, “The child, by reason of his physical and mental immaturity, needs special safeguards and care, including appropriate legal protection, before as well as after birth.” Why is the Minister ignoring the rights of the unborn child recognised by these laws and Conventions?

Christian morality defends the right to life of the unborn. It upholds the fifth commandment, “Thou shalt not kill.” The Minister in making his statement is declaring that that commandment is invalid. Why is the Minister failing to uphold this most basic principles of the Christian morality, which is the foundation of our society?

Right to Life believes that the Minister in rejecting objective moral truths Is leading our country down a dark path in promoting secular humanism. In rejecting Christian tradition which holds that morality is something objective and fixed, then what is right today may be wrong tomorrow; all things are subject to change, even truth and justice.

Right to Life requests that Parliament reaffirm that the unborn child is a human being endowed with human rights and rejects the Abortion Legislation Bill which threatens the lives of our vulnerable unborn and the health and welfare of their mothers.

Justice is the foundation of a peaceful society, there can be no peace in our land while we continue to kill our children.

Ken Orr
Spokesperson,
Right to Life.

Is the Abortion Select Committee a Threat to Life of Our Unborn?

by 1 Comment

Right to Life is concerned that the Abortion Legislation Select Committee represents a threat to the lives of the unborn, to the health and welfare of women and to the democratic process.

The Minister of Justice has established a special committee to consider this contentious and life threatening bill, an action that is highly irregular. There are twelve Select Committees in Parliament. This bill would have been expected to be referred to the Justice Select Committee, why did the Minister not do this?

Right to Life is concerned that this Committee is stacked with strong supporters of the bill. Of the seven MPs on the Committee, five are strongly in support of this bill and the “right” of women to kill their unborn children. Right to Life believes that they have been carefully chosen with the intention of stifling opposition and speedily rubber stamping this bill.

Right to Life is concerned that this Committee is chaired by the Hon Ruth Dyson, who believes that killing a child in the womb is a health service. The Chairperson of the Abortion Legislation Committee, in a media release is calling for public submissions on the Abortion Legislation Bill. She has said that, “The bill seeks to have abortion services provided like other health services. It would do this by decriminalising abortion, modernising legislation related to abortion and better aligning the regulation of abortion services with that of other health services.” This statement is alarming, the killing of the unborn is not a health service. How can Abortion be regarded as a health service when its purpose is to kill another human being?

Right to Life believes that the community should be concerned at recent statements from the Minister Andrew Little. He is reported in the media as saying that he wants this bill passed before Christmas. We ask why is this and why the urgency? This is not for the benefit of Parliament, the nation or of women, it is for the benefit of the Labour led government who do not want this contentious human rights issue causing a problem for their re-election campaign in the 2020 general election.

In introducing the bill in Parliament, Little said, “I reject the notion that abortion entailed killing another human being and I accept on legal and on moral grounds that human rights do not accrue until human life is possible.” It is of great concern that we have a Minister of Justice who believes that the unborn child is not a human being and that it should not be a crime to kill an unborn child.

It is the right of citizens in a parliamentary democracy to be given sufficient time to make submissions on important legislation. Right to Life believes that the Minister has instructed this Committee to restrict the time allowed for submissions to six weeks to discourage submissions and the right of citizens to defend life and be heard. It should be noted that the Justice Select Committee allowed twelve weeks for the community to make submissions on David Seymour’s End of Life Choice Bill.

We believe that the Minister is fearful that there is massive opposition to this bill and is afraid that there will be another 40,000 submissions defending the lives of our unborn children and the health of their mothers. We believe his action in shortening the expected public consultation timeframe is because he does not want a repetition of public opposition as was evidenced by the 39,159 submissions received by the Justice Committee on the End of Life Choice bill and the 1,350 persons who made oral submissions to it. An analysis of the submissions revealed that over 90 per cent were opposed to euthanasia. It is clear that Andrew Little wants to supress opposition to the bill in order to facilitate the Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern’s determination to make the killing of the unborn ‘a reproductive choice for women.”

Right to Life asks; Why are the media, who are at the service of the community not challenging the government on their erosion of our Parliamentary democracy?

Ken Orr
Spokesperson,
Right to Life

The Time to Speak Up on Abortion is Now

by Leave a Comment

The following post is a guest post by Pro-life writer Lydia Mead. Lydia sets and example to all of us by writing one of the first submissions to the Special Select Committee now set up to consider the government’s Abortion Legislation Act. The government has decided that public submissions to this act will only be for another month. This in itself is a major cause for concern given the seriousness implications of this Act, which effectively provides for abortion up to birth. Let us follow her example in speaking out in defence of our innocent unborn by making a submission as soon as possible.

Here’s the link to make your submission: https://www.parliament.nz/…/52SCA…/abortion-legislation-bill

Your submission matters. The numbers matter. Make your submission even if it’s just two sentences. Now is your time to take a stand. Lydia’s post reads…

To whom it may concern,

I strongly oppose decriminalisation of abortion, for the following reasons.

1) The Bill of Rights 1961 and The Contraception, Sterilization and Abortion Act 1977 protects the life of the unborn child. I disagree that either of these legislations are archaic and need to be updated to reflect current malpractice. The Bill of Rights and the CSA Act protect the unborn child and recognise it for what it is – a human being, and a particularly vulnerable human being with no one to speak for or defend it except for the law. When these acts were codified, the information from science and from ultrasound imaging made the fact of the unborn child being human and very much alive an incontravertible truth. In 2019, there is much more information regarding who the unborn child is – they are simply who we all have been, passing through a stage we all must go through. 3D and 4D imaging of the unborn child, and the breakthroughs in life-saving treatment in hospitals to care for babies as young as 22 weeks+ who now have a strong chance of surviving – these are developments that should cause us to reflect on what it is we are doing if we take away every single protection of the unborn child.

2) That this law would allow a baby to be aborted up to birth. I have read the information on the government website regarding this law and I understand that: Any of the 3 models as laid out in the draft abortion bill (as of 08/08/2019) is unthinkable because the unborn child is not recognised as a party that will be impacted by the decision of the mother and/or physician. Any of these 3 models will allow for abortion up to birth for any reason – the only possible provision being, that a physician may be required to first consider the mother’s physical and mental health and general wellbeing. This consideration is highly vague and gives the physician no strong legal mandate to prevent a woman procuring an abortion.

2)a The argument might be made, that only a small percentage of abortions are performed after the 22 week of pregnancy, and so there would be no increase in the occurrence of late term abortions. However, when the government takes the provision of abortion out of the Crimes Act it promotes within society the feeling that there is nothing else to be considered except how the woman feels about the pregnancy and her wellbeing. Concurrently, the Government intends to make us all feel better about abortion. If the Government says abortion is not a crime and it’s just healthcare, then increasingly we’ll adapt our thinking to match this brave new world. The reason that abortion was dealt with in the criminal code in 1961 and 1977 was because it was rightly understood that there was more than one party in an abortion, and that the abortion would end the life of the child. To treat abortion as a healthcare issue denies the existence of the unborn child as an affected party. Abortion even in early stages used to be considered unthinkable to the greater population. The more abortion is procured in the decades following these acts, and the more our friends and family have abortions, the more that we regard abortion as an unfortunate necessity.

3) Abortion always stops a beating human heart. Scientifically this is incontravertible. We now know that a medical abortion always kills a child.

4) The bill has ignored the involvement of another legitimate party in the abortion: the father. In the current bill, the unborn child has been abandoned by everyone: its mother, its father, and the law. It has absolutely no legal protection, and its father has no legal recognition as such. It is unthinkable that the father of a child can do absolutely nothing to stop his child being killed.

5) The bill seeks to discriminate against potential medical employees. If you are qualified and applying for a medical position but disagree with abortion, an employer may reject your application on the basis of your conscientious objection if they think that your objection will cause disruption to their activities.

6) The bill discriminates against anyone else with a conscientious objection to abortion who seeks to give help to women going to an abortion clinic within a 150 metre zone of the abortion facility. The unborn child is then even more abandoned – by its mother, father, legal protection and finally a last possible saviour in the form of a caring sidewalk counselor. People who gather around an abortion facility do not do so to threaten or intimidate women. They care about women, and they care about unborn children, and they extend support to women going through a difficult time. The reason the come to the abortion facilities is because they love the women and do not want them not to go through with something that will hurt them and destroy their children.

My recommendations:
Please reconsider that our abortion law needs to be reformed to meet current practice. If abortion provision is removed from the Crimes Act and transferred to the medical world, it will strip the unborn child of every legal protection and allow for our future new kiwis to be killed up to birth. Please consider that it is vital for the unborn child to have legal recognition, in the exact same way as it is vital for every New Zealander to have legal recognition and protection. For this to continue, abortion MUST be regulated by the crimes act.

Lydia is also a guest writer for Right to Life and you can see her previous posts here  and here. 

This is the website of Right to Life NZ Inc.
%d bloggers like this: