Right to Life New Zealand

Upholding the sanctity of Human life and Standing Up for the Vulnerable

Justice Demands a Referendum to Recognise Right to Life of Our Unborn Children

by 4 Comments

Media Release July 27th 2019

Right to Life requests that the Labour led government conduct a binding referendum, the question being:- “Do you recognise the unborn child from implantation as being a human being endowed by its Creator with human rights, the foundation right being an inalienable right to life?” This is the justice issue of our era.

Right to Life requests that our Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern as a woman and as a mother lead by example, to give legal recognition to the unborn child as a human being from implantation endowed with human rights, the foundation right being the right to life.

The Minister of Justice in a response of the 16th March to an Official Information Act request from Right to Life confirmed that the government supported the born alive law contained in Section 159 of the Crimes Act 1961, that an unborn child does not become a human being until it is born. The section states that the born alive law was “for the purposes of the Crimes Act”. It was never the intention of Parliament to deny the humanity of the unborn child. This whole section is a legal fiction intended to differentiate between homicide and the killing of an unborn child.

A poll conducted by AC Nielsen in 2004 on behalf of Right to Life found considerable support for recognising the humanity of the unborn child, The poll of 1000 persons found that 36% believed that the unborn child became a human being at conception, 14% at the time of implantation and 28 % at a point between implantation and birth. There were therefore a total of 78% who believed that the unborn child was a human being before birth. And a poll of a 1,000 persons conducted by Curia Market Research in April 2019 on behalf of Family First found 47 % believed that the human rights  of the unborn child should be legally protected from about six weeks once a heartbeat can be detected. Instead of following it’s own agenda, why does the government not amend the law to reflect public opinion?

There are a small number of well organised persons, headed by Jacinda Ardern, that are resisting the legal recognition of the unborn child’s right to life. Leading the charge are the anti-feminist movement led by, the Family Planning Association, the Green Party, and the radical left of the Labour Party, all of whom are strident advocates for the killing of our innocent and defenceless unborn.

It is disappointing that our government has $2.2 million to conduct a referendum on legalising the personal use of cannabis, an issue that is a threat to the lives and health of New Zealanders. It is shameful that the government gives priority to legalising the smoking of cannabis but has no interest in promoting the right to life of our unborn. New Zealand cannot be considered a just society until the New Zealand bill of Rights protects the human rights of every New Zealander from conception to natural death.

We can not state more clearly that Jacinda Ardern is the prime driver for the decriminalisation of abortion in New Zealand. The Prime Minister, does not recognise the humanity of the unborn child, nor its right to life. Right to Life believes that it is her belief that the child is the property of the mother. It is her wish that abortion be taken out of the Crimes Act and treated as a health issue. She believes that the killing of an unborn child should not be a crime, but a human right. She believes the killing of an unborn child should be treated as a “reproductive choice for women”.

This is astounding as the Prime Minister on the 19 January 2018 was jubilant in announcing that “she was pregnant with her first child”. She has felt her baby kick, she has heard its heart beat and watched in awe at scans showing the wondrous miracle of creation developing in her womb, truly a beautiful baby and a unique and unrepeatable miracle of creation endowed with a right to life. How then can she be in denial about the humanity of the unborn child and its right to life?

Ken Orr
Spokesperson,
Right to Life

Letter to Andrew Little -Proposed Abortion Law Changes

by Leave a Comment

Hon. Andrew Little,
Minister of Justice,
6th June 2019

Dear Minister,

Proposed Abortion Law Changes

Thank you for your letter of 11 April. You express the view that abortion should be a health service. Health services protect life and promote health. Abortion is not a health service because it results in the violent death of a patient, a defenceless and innocent human being in its first nine months of life.  How can we talk of better health outcomes when a patient has been violently killed?

I share your desire to ensure that women considering terminating the life of their child in the womb are not burdened with the unjustified and cruel burden of believing that they are criminals. The law is explicit in making it clear that women may not be charged under the Crimes Act with a crime. It should be noted that it is only Family Planning and advocates for abortion who continue to inflict this burden on women by constantly claiming falsely that the abortion law makes criminals out of women. The pro-life movement is highly protective of women and their unborn and we will never burden women with this false association with criminality.

There is, however, a stigma associated with the taking of the life of another human being. This stigma is recognised by all cultures throughout human history and one which is vitally necessary for the preservation of the human race. This prohibition of the taking of innocent human life is the foundation of the law, ethics and of medicine. It would be the height of folly to seek to remove this stigma which is protective of our humanity.

Every woman is imbued with a maternal instinct that immediately seeks to nurture and protect the developing child in her womb. Every woman, no matter how distressing the circumstances of her pregnancy, knows that it is wrong to harm her child. A woman seeking an abortion is making a cry for help. A woman does not seek an abortion like a woman seeking a Porche, but like an animal that is prepared to gnaw her leg off to free herself from a trap. We will not genuinely help women by pretending that there is no stigma and guilt associated with the killing of her child. the weakest and most defenceless member of the human family. There is no change that Parliament can make to the law to remove this stigma, because the stigma is written indelibly in our conscience and on our hearts.

In your last paragraph you state that my letter underscores my essential position on abortion when I asked the question, “Do you then believe that women should be permitted to endanger their lives by bringing about their own miscarriage or permitting someone else to do that?” You believed that my reason for posing the question was that I did not trust women to make a decision about abortion.

The issue is not trust but protection for women and the unborn. I do not believe that any person has the right to kill another human being, simply because their existence is a cause of inconvenience. The first duty of the State is to protect the human rights of every member of the community from conception to natural death and not to preside over our destruction. We have a special duty to protect the weak and the vulnerable in our community. The Royal Commission on Contraception Sterilisation and Abortion stated in its report to Parliament that “the unborn child, the weakest and most defenceless member of the human family deserved special protection from implantation.”

Abortion is also violence against women. We have a duty to protect women from coercion, domestic violence and the threat of abandonment by the father of the child if the abused woman does not have an abortion. In conclusion, I believe that our women deserve better than abortion and that we do not promote the freedom and equality of women by informing them that the state does not have any interest in protecting them and their unborn children. The changing of our laws to make killing unborn children a ‘health’ issue rather than a crime, would send a strong signal that it is a woman’s right to choose whether her chldren live or die.

Your government’s proposals to devalue innocent human life, will not only corrupt at an individual level but will metastasize to spread through our entire society. Laws have consequences; bad ideas have victims.

Yours sincerely

Ken Orr,


Secretary

NZ Family Planning – Peddlers of Death

by Leave a Comment

Family Planning have revealed their plans for the decriminalisation of abortion and the killing of the unborn in its latest media release made by Jackie Edmund their CEO. It is important that the community are aware of the anti-feminist and anti-family agenda of Family Planning.

Family Planning in the 1950s was in accord with the true feminist movement that saw abortion as murder of the unborn and part of the war on women. A Family Planning pamphlet at that time had a message similar to this one from American Planned Parenthood which read “Abortion kills life after it has begun… Abortion is dangerous to your life and health”… my how things have changed.

Right to Life readily acknowledges that Family Planning employs many good health professionals who sincerely believe that they are helping women. It is indeed sad that they do not recognise the intrinsic dignity of women as life bearers and the truth that if we care and love women we will love both them and their unborn child.

The infiltration and takeover of Family Planning by the pro-abortion movement was a great loss to the women of New Zealand.

Family Planning believes:

  • That an unborn child is not a human being and does not become a human being until it is born. They warn that we should be careful not to humanise the unborn by calling it a baby or a child.
  • Killing an unborn child should be a “reproductive health choice for women“, not be a crime and that abortion should be taken out of the Crimes Act.
  • That we should have “a common sense, rational and medically informed conversation about abortion law reform”.
  • That we should “put abortion care within a health framework, managed like any other health service which puts the women at  the centre of the decision -making”.

Right to Life believes that Family Planning is not qualified to participate in “a common sense, rational and medically informed conversation about abortion law reform”. We say this because they refuse to recognise that the unborn child from conception is a human being endowed by its Creator with an inalienable right to life.

Family Planning refuses to acknowledge that abortion is violence against women and her unborn child. It refuses to acknowledge that abortion is not health care and that abortion is the only medical procedure that has the specific intention of killing an unborn child, a patient, and the weakest and most defenceless member of the human family.

Family Planning support Option A, proposed by the Law Commission. Under this option, there would be no statutory test that must be satisfied before an abortion could be performed. The decision whether to have an abortion would be made by the woman concerned in consultation with her health practitioner. This option would provide for abortion up to birth for any reason, as Jacki Edmund has said “any reason is a good reason for an abortion”. If adopted it would be the most radical abortion law in the world.

Right to Life continues to question the government as to why it continues to fund Family Planning, which is not only anti-feminist, anti-family but which is also actively undermining the morals of our children with its sex education programmes.

We must also continue to ask why the media provide an inordinate amount of coverage to Family Planning, as self- appointed spokeswomen for women when they do not represent their best interests.  Family Planning is the major abortion referral agency in New Zealand and is probably responsible for more than 100,000 abortions since 1977. Right to Life believes that it is the intention of Family Planning to turn all of their clinics into abortion mills. We call on the government to stop making all of us complicit in the killing of our children through our funding Family Planning, by payment of income tax.

Ken Orr
Spokesperson,
Right to Life

Andrew Little Seeks Removal of Stigma Associated with Killing Unborn Children

by Leave a Comment

Media Release 20 April 2019

The Minister of Justice, Andrew Little should be at the forefront in defending the right to life of every New Zealander from conception to natural death. Sadly he is not. Instead he is advocating not only for the killing of the defenceless unborn child as a “reproductive choice for women”, but also for the killing by doctors of the aged, the disabled and the seriously ill, through the End of Life Choice bill. He believes it’s all about ‘choice’.

Right to Life is disappointed that the Minister of Justice in a letter to our Society dated 11 April said, “the current framework around abortion is that it is a crime in the first instance. This attaches a heavy stigma to a woman who is considering an abortion …”

This stigma is a mark of disgrace that has been recognised by mankind since the beginning of time. This stigma is associated with the taking of innocent human life. It  is recognised internationally by all cultures and races. There is nothing the Minister can do to remove this stigma from the state funded and authorised genocide of our defenceless unborn which has killed more than 500,00 children since 1977. This stigma was instituted by God in support of His Fifth commandment, “Thou shalt not kill.”

To deny the stigma against taking innocent human life it is necessary to deny the humanity of the unborn child. Medical science tells us that human life begins at conception. Family Planning have warned against humanising the child in the womb and always uses language in describing the developing child, to achieve that goal.

It is the intention of the Labour led government to remove abortion from the Crimes Act and to make abortion a “reproductive choice for women.” The stigma is protective of women. The campaign to decriminalise abortion conducted by the government, is supported by the Family Planning Association.

The authors of previous genocides sought to remove the stigma associated with the murder of the innocent; the Turkish genocide of the Armenians, the Nazi genocide of the Jews, the genocide of the Cambodians by the Kymer Rouge and the Hutu genocide of the Tutsis in Rwanda. The government disguises the genocide by euphemistically calling it ‘health care’. To say that the government’s intention is to promote abortion as health care is akin to describing the gas chambers at Auschwitz as health spas.

The very foundational principle of our laws and medicine is the total prohibition on the taking of innocent human life. Abortion is the violent murder of an innocent child. Women instinctively want to protect the life of the child growing in their womb. The stigma resonnates with the conscience of women, which informs them that killing their child in the womb is always wrong.

The stigma is more intense for those women who have had an abortion especially those who have been coerced by the father of the child. Men who have fathered a child often threaten to abandon the mother or use violence against her, if she objects to having an abortion.

Those who seek to remove the stigma refuse to acknowledge that there are many women in our community who are suffering a lifetime of regret, grief and sorrow at the loss of their child in an abortion.


Right to Life requests the Minister  recognise that the killing of the unborn child is a crime against humanity and should be left in the Crimes Act. The government should promote adoption as the loving option.

Ken Orr
Spokesperson,
Right to Life

Newshub’s Jessie Mulligan “Surely not all those who (oppose oppose abortion decriminalisation) are “hard core religious types and weirdos”

by Leave a Comment

Jessie Mulligan

The Manager Media Works,

Dear Sir

Formal complaint.

I wish to lodge a formal complaint on behalf of Right to Life against an item on the decriminalisation of abortion that featured on the Project at 7 PM on 13 March, 2019. Note: Facebook link

My complaint is that the item breached the Broadcasting Standards Authority’s standards Standard 6 Discrimination and Denigration, Standard 8 Balance and Standard 9 Accuracy.

Standard 6 Discrimination. The presenter, Jessie Mulligan, made a statement and asked “surely not all those ‘who were opposed to the decriminalisation of abortion’ were “hard core religious types and weirdos.”

This statement denigrates those who are opposed to the killing of the unborn who are the weakest and most defenceless members of the human family. Why is it weird to defend the right to life of the voiceless? Why is it weird to recognise abortion as violence against women? There are many women who have had an abortion and who are now living a life of grief, sorrow and regret and who now seek to protect other women from the violence of abortion. The statement was discriminatory as it seeks to silence and deny the right of those who are opposed to abortion to be heard. Opposition to the violence of abortion is not a religious issue, one does not have to be religious to be opposed to violence against women and their unborn.

I believe that justice demands that Mr Mulligan now makes a public apology on the Project programme to the thousands of viewers who he has offended and insulted.

The most dangerous place for a New Zealander today is in the mother’s womb.The item confirms and perpetuates the ultimate discrimination against the unborn that only those who are wanted have a right to life and those who are classified as “unwanted”, may be killed.  

Standard 8 Balance. The item lacked balance as it was evident that the proposal to decriminalise abortion had the open support of all the presenters. It is contended that the ethics of the journalism profession requires that journalists adopt a neutral stance on contentious social issues.

A female presenter stated that she had terminated the life of her second child because it was unwanted and supported the decriminalisation of abortion. There are many women in our community who have had an abortion who regret it and are opposed to the decriminalisation of abortion. To achieve balance why was such a woman not interviewed?

The Minister of Justice, Andrew Little, was interviewed on his plans to present a bill to decriminalise abortion. To achieve balance, why was there no interview of an opposition MP to present a case to oppose decriminalisation?

The CEO of Family Planning, Jacki Edmund, was interviewed for 2 minutes and 14 seconds making claims that the current legislation violated human rights and should be taken out of the Crimes Act. Abortion is in the Crimes Act, Crimes against the person Part VIII. Section 182 Killing unborn child and is a crime to kill an unborn child. To achieve balance, why was there no person from the pro-life movement  interviewed to challenge the false statements made by Edmund? Why too did the presenters fail to ask Edmund to justify her contention that abortion should be taken out of the Crimes Act and for the killing of an unborn child to no longer be a crime? There is no United Nations convention or law in New Zealand that supports abortion as a human right. Why did the presenter fail to challenge Edmund on the accuracy of her statements?

The item lacked balance as the introduction to the item showed a small number of abortion supporters holding placards in support of abortion. To show balance why were there no shots showing the more that 1,200 people, young and old, who joyfully and peacefully marched on Parliament on Saturday 8th December 2018, defending life, supporting women and opposing the decriminalisation of abortion?

Standard 9 Accuracy. The item was misleading in that it promoted the proposition that abortion should not be in the Crimes Act without addressing why abortion is in the Crimes Act. The law recognises that the state has an interest and a duty to protect the lives of its future citizens. It also recognises in sections 182 and 183 that the unborn child has a right to be born. This protection has been there since 1856. The Crimes Act declares that it is a serious crime to kill an unborn child. There was no attempt in this programme to produce evidence to support the claim made by the Prime Minister and the Minister of Justice that abortion should not be a crime ie that it is no longer a crime to kill an unborn child. It should be known that the Prime Minister and the Minister of Justice when asked recently by Right to Life under the Official Information Act what evidence they had to support their claim that it was not a crime to kill an unborn child replied that they had no evidence and that it was just their opinion. 

The Project team are commended  for producing a quality current affairs programme, it is disappointing that this item did not reach their normal high standard.

Yours sincerely

Ken Orr

Secretary

ken @righttolife.org.nz    

Abortion Violence is Not a Health Issue Jacinda Ardern

by 1 Comment

The state has a duty to protect women and their unborn from violence. In 1856 the New Zealand Parliament recognised that abortion was violence against both women and the unborn and made abortion unlawful under the Crimes Act, Part VIII Crimes against the Person. Abortion was recognised as a serious crime in the Common Law of England. 

The Labour led government of Jacinda Ardern under the guise of empowering women is proposing to decriminalise abortion and disguise the violence by calling it a “health service” this is not empowerment but slavery. 

Abortion is not health care. The government’s proposal is a shameful abandonment of women and will expose women to increased violence. This cruel deception of women perpetrated by the government is deceiving women into believing that their unborn child has no value and that the state has no interest in protecting her or her defenceless unborn. Their claim is that, when we kill an unborn child, we do no harm as it is not a human being and it therefore has no rights.

Vulnerable women will be exposed to increased coercion, physical and sexual violence from the father of their children who will be empowered to impose pressure on women to terminate the life of their children. This is because for the many women who are facing coercion to abort their child against their will, they will, if abortion is no longer a crime, have even less power to resist the coercion of the father or those pushing them in the direction of killing. Arguments such as “it’s only a health issue”, will be used against the mother. [Read more…]

Andrew Little “ Abortion Should Not be a Crime”

by 2 Comments

The Minister of Justice in a letter to Right to Life dated 16 March 2018 stated that “this government believes that abortion is a health issue, that is a reproductive choice” and “the government and I do not believe that abortion should be a crime.”  

The inconvenient truth for Andrew Little is that human life begins at conception and the child is endowed with an inalienable right to life and is entitled to the protection of the law.

Protection for the right to life of the unborn child has been in the Crimes Act since 1856. Abortion entails the killing of the weakest and most defenceless member of the human family. It has always been a crime to kill an unborn child. Right to Life believes that the Minister of Justice has a duty to explain to the community why he and his government now believe that it should no longer a crime to kill an unborn child.

The Minister claims that “New Zealand generally adheres to the born alive rule and thus prior to birth a foetus does not hold status as a legal person.” The Minister would be aware that section 159 of the Crimes Act  Killing of a child, states, “A child becomes a human being within the meaning of this Act when it has completely proceeded in a living state from the body of its mother, whether it has breathed or not  and whether the naval string is severed or not.”

While this is what the law states it should be recognised that this is a legal fiction used to differentiate homicide from the killing of an unborn child. When formulating this law it was never the intention of Parliament to deny the personhood of the unborn child. It is noteworthy that this section refers to the child in utero as a child, not a fetus as quoted by the Minister which is the language of the Family Planning Association. This association seeks to dehumanise the child by refusing to call the unborn a child or a baby. It would be a grave injustice for the Minister to now seek to exploit this section in order to deny the humanity of the unborn child and claim that we do no harm when we kill an unborn child and that it is not a crime because the child has no rights. [Read more…]

The honouring of Catherine Healy with Knighthood offensive to women  

by Leave a Comment

Right to Life believes that the honouring of Catherine Healy, National co-ordinator of the NZ Prostitutes Collective with a knighthood, “for services to the rights of sex workers”, is deeply offensive to the women of New Zealand.

The award was made by Her Majesty the Queen on the recommendation of the Cabinet Appointments and Honours Committee chaired by the Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern. The Right Hon Winston Peters also sits on this Committee. 

Right to Life asks the Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern how she is promoting the dignity and equality of women by honouring the woman who assisted in drafting the Prostitution Reform Act, which has inflicted violence, degradation and exploitation on women? 

It is making a public statement that our women are for sale and signifies that the government approves and supports young women selling their bodies to men to be sexually assaulted for their sexual satisfaction; this is slavery. It supports men living off the earnings of prostitutes and women prostituting themselves on the streets. It supports paid sexual attacks on women as work. There have been at least four young women prostitutes brutally murdered since the passing of the infamous Prostitution Reform Act in 2003. Prostitution and abortion both come from a culture of death, they both inflict violence on innocent women. Women deserve to be respected as the bearers of new life and the mothers of the next generation. 

How many women must be murdered before Parliament repeals this appalling Act? [Read more…]

Family Planning’s Continuing War on Women

by Leave a Comment

The Family Planning Association [FPA] in its submission to the Law Commission support the proposal of the Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern to take abortion out of the Crimes Act and to treat abortion as a health issue that is a reproductive choice for women, rather than as a criminal issue. The unborn child has no human rights until it is born. It should no longer be a crime to kill an unborn child. 

The FPA with the requested law change intends, “to further develop abortion services to meet the needs of the community”. It would be a catastrophe for women and their defenceless unborn if the FPA developed its 29 clinics in New Zealand into killing centres. 

The FPA claim that the current abortion legislation, “is no longer fit for purpose from both a health and human rights perspective. Women’s lives and status in society have changed since the 1970s.”

Right to Life obtained their submission from the Law Commission under the Official Information Act.  The FPA submit that it is no longer necessary to have abortions authorised by two certifying consultants or for abortions to be performed in licensed hospitals or clinics. The Association believes that most surgical and medical abortions can be performed in community and primary care clinics including FPA clinics, with no specialised facilities required.

The FPA in its submission have:-

  • Rejected the duty of the State to protect the lives of the unborn, its future citizens.
  • Believes that life begins at birth and accepts the killing of the unborn up to birth for any reason including that the child was the wrong sex.
  • Accepted the killing of those those with Down syndrome, up to birth.
  • Accepted abortion up to birth for socio-economic reasons.

Right to Life asks the FPA how do you reconcile your claim to be advocates for women when you support the killing of women in the womb ? [Read more…]

Mother’s Day Painful for Mothers who have lost a child through Abortion or Miscarriage

by Leave a Comment

Media Release Sunday May 13th 2018

On this day that we celebrate motherhood let us remember those mothers who have tragically lost a child through abortion or miscarriage. For many, Mother’s day can be a day of great sadness. Mothers never ever forget their child lost in abortion and often experience a lifetime of regret, grief and sorrow. We should acknowledge their pain and share their grief. We should mourn with those who weep.

Since 1978 there have been more than 500,000 New Zealand children killed in the womb. There are in our community, tens of thousands of women who have been deeply wounded by the loss of their child in abortion.  Many grieve in silence, because unlike for those who lose a child stillborn, society does not recognise the right to grieve over children lost to abortion. There are few who realise their pain.  Many of these women, perhaps the majority have been coerced into having an abortion, that they did not want. Many too have been abandoned by the father of their child. Those who promote abortion, like Family Planning, tell women that they are imagining grief and that there are no adverse psychological consequences.

Today motherhood is under attack as never before with our Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern, proposing to decriminalise abortion. [Read more…]

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