Right to Life New Zealand

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

Why is the Prime Minister avoiding responding to the Official Information Act?

by Leave a Comment

child of 20 weeks

Abortion by Dismemberment up to two weeks past this stage of child development is what the government proposes.

Right to Life is concerned that the Prime Minister,Jacinda Ardern has declined to answer important questions on public policy sent to her by our Society on 15 January 2019.

The principle questions asked were:-

  • Is it still your policy to retain a restriction on abortions imposed at 20 weeks gestation in the Crimes Act section 187A in your proposed legislation to decriminalise abortion?
  • Is it your policy to accept dismemberment abortions that permit an abortionist to tear the arms, legs and head off an unborn child?

The new coalition government has specifically made a commitment to “strengthen New Zealand’s democracy by increasing public participation, openness, and transparency around official information”. Right to Life believes that the Prime Minister has a duty to lead by example.

The Crimes Act stipulates that the cut – off point for abortions is 20 weeks, The cut-off point in the legislation being drafted by the Minister of Justice is 22 weeks. Mike Munroe, Chief of Staff of the Prime Minister’s Office advised on 24 January that he was referring our Official Information Request to the Minister of Justice, as he was responsible for “alternative approaches on abortion law.”

At the Newstalk ZB’s Leader’s Breakfast just prior to the election Jacinda Ardern made the following statement:-

“Yes I think abortion should come out of the Crimes Act. That does not mean for a moment that I am proposing what has been claimed, that you should be able to have on-demand abortion to birth. No that is absolutely not what I am saying. We of course must regulate… We have time periods already set out in the law and I am not proposing changes to that. I am proposing it comes out of the Crimes Act.”

This is an important public policy statement concerning abortion. The public have an absolute right to ask the Prime Minister, who believes that killing an unborn child should not be a crime, is relentlessly driving a change in the abortion law to remove abortion from the Crimes Act and to make abortion a “reproductive choice for women”. Will she support retaining the 20 week cut off as she has publicly stated?

The minister of Justice at the direction of the Prime Minister is to bring a bill to Parliament to adopt the Law Commission’s Model C. Under this Model, there would be no statutory test until 22 weeks of a pregnancy.  After 22 weeks, the health practitioner who intends to perform an abortion would need to be satisfied that the abortion is appropriate in the circumstances, having regard to the woman’s physical and mental health and wellbeing. Everyone knows what this means, – effectively abortion on demand up to birth.

Curia Market Research an independent pollster released in January 2018, polling of 1,013 persons. Just 9% support the current legal limit for an abortion of 20 weeks. Only 4% believe it should be later than 20 weeks, including up to birth. 50% think the time limit should be shorter than the current 20 weeks, and a further 36% were unsure.

The median choice of those who did choose a time limit was 15 weeks.
Significantly, 56% of women think the time limit should be less than the current 20 weeks. Incredibly, 53% of those who generally support abortion think the time
limit should be less than the current 20 weeks – 29% of abortion supporters say 10 weeks or less.There is increasing opposition in the United States to the violence and suffering imposed on defenceless unborn children by dismemberment abortions. There are now ten states that have outlawed this horrific violence on the defenceless.

The public have a right to know if the Prime Minister who is herself a loving mother of a young child supports protecting the unborn from this dismemberment violence.

Ken Orr
Spokesperson,
Right to Life

Where Have All Our Children Gone?

by Leave a Comment

I'm a child not a choiceMedia Release Wednesday 30th Jan 2019

Nearly 61,000 5 year olds will commence their schooling this week, happy and laughing, full of the joy of life. Sadly around 13,200 children who would have been the same age are missing. What would have been their joy and laughter replaced by a deathly silence. This represents nearly 520 empty class rooms of children. What a loss to our nation! They join the ranks of the 500,000 children who have been murdered in their mother’s womb since 1977. These are the children who were considered of little worth and whose lives were terminated by abortion. These are the nameless and whose only record of existence is a cold statistic in the Abortion Supervisory Committee’s annual report to Parliament of 2014.

Their absence is mourned for they were created with many talents to enrich our society. They were formed in their mother’s wombs by their Creator with loving care. Our society is impoverished by their absence. We should also have deep compassion for their mothers who will be mourning the loss of their children. Many will suffer in painful and lonely silence having been told by Family Planning that what was aborted was just the contents of the uterus; that abortion is safe and that their grief is just their imagination. Mothers, who are so often coerced into an unwanted abortion, because of their abandonment by the father or because of pressure from family and friends. [Read more…]

Why is the life of a Kea worth more than that of an unborn child?

by 2 Comments

totally unprotected.jpg

Right to Life asks why is the life of a Kea worth more than the life a Human Child.

It is a sad commentary on our society that the killing of a Kea incurs the full weight of the law and the wrath of the court and the community while a Wellington doctor who was responsible for killing thousands of innocent and defenceless unborn children was honoured by the Queen with a Knighthood for “services to women.”
A 46 year old construction worker, was sentenced to 150 hours community work by Judge Tony Zohrab in the Nelson District Court on 23 January for killing a kea, an endangered species in the Motueka Valley in July 2017. Juliette Irwin, the prosecuting lawyer for DOC sought a fine of between $10,000 and $15,000. She stated that, “this was a callous killing, we have an animal victim who is defenceless and unable to complain.”  The Judge accepted that the accused was unable to pay a fine.

Under the Wildlife Act 1953, the Kea is an absolutely protected species. Its killing is a serious crime, on conviction the offender may be fined up to $100,000, or imprisoned for up to two years. This crime was considered important news and was given extensive coverage by all the media in New Zealand.
But again we ask why is a Kea given absolute legal protection for its right to life, while the unborn child’s right to life is given no legal protection?

While we acknowledge that it is important that we have respect and have legislation protecting the right to life of endangered species, Right to Life questions why our nation is prepared to legislate for absolute protection for the right to life of endangered species, yet is not prepared to respect or provide any legal protection for the right to life of children in the womb.

At the same time an estimated 35 children in the womb are deprived of their life each day in New Zealand with the permission of Parliament, government and the community.

It is an appalling injustice that the Labour led government of Jacinda Ardern is committed to decriminalising abortion as they believe that it is not a crime to kill an unborn child. The government is of course committed to retaining the killing of a Kea as a crime.

Ken Orr
Spokesperson,
Right to Life

The most dangerous place for a New Zealander is in its mother’s womb

by 3 Comments

Jacinda Ardern5.jpg

Media Release Friday 4th January 2019

If the government is really concerned about protecting the lives of New Zealanders, why is it funding as a core health service, the killing of our unborn in our public hospitals by doctors paid by the state?

Our nation grieves at the nearly 400 New Zealanders who were killed on New Zealand roads in 2018. Every death is a tragedy for the family and for the community. While we grieve at these appalling statistics, we should remember that the most dangerous place for a New Zealander today is not on the road but in a mother’s womb.

In 2017 there were 13,285 unborn children killed in their mother’s womb in abortions. All of these were preventable deaths. An estimated one in five New Zealanders are violently killed before birth in an abortion. For every death on the road there are more than 33 children killed before birth. This is a violation of human rights and a crime against humanity. Why is our nation not grieving the deaths of these defenceless and innocent children and why are the Churches and the media silent?

The government is commendably concerned at our terrible road toll and is committed to investing $1.4 billion over three years to make urgent safety improvements across our high risk roads to bring the road toll down. This is the same government that refuses to invest any money into promoting adoption as a loving option. There are thousands of loving New Zealand families who are longing to adopt a child; tragically there are few children available for adoption as they end up as medical waste at the local landfill. This is an appalling human tragedy that should reduce us to tears.

It is inconceivable that the Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern and her Labour led government are on one hand is endeavouring to protect the lives of New Zealanders on our roads while at the same time believing that it is not a crime to kill an unborn New Zealander. It is now planning to facilitate the killing of New Zealanders before birth by taking abortion out of the Crimes Act and making it “a reproductive choice for women”.

Right to Life requests that the government repudiates its contentious and unjust proposals. They have no mandate to decriminalise abortion and shoulf dedicate their efforts to protect the lives of all New Zealanders both in the womb and on our roads. We also request that the government introduce a campaign to promote open adoption which would protect the life of the baby and provide the birth mother with the opportunity to participate in the life of her precious infant.

 

Ken Orr

Spokesperson

Right to Life

Privacy Commissioner makes error of judgement

by Leave a Comment

John Edwards Privacy Commissioner
Right to Life believes that the Privacy Commissioner, John Edwards, has made a fundemental error of judgement in his submission to the law Commision by recommending that abortion be taken out of the Crimes Act and made a “reproductive choice for women.”
The Commissioner made the astounding claim that having abortion included under the Crimes Act was a breach of the privacy of the woman. His reasoning was that it exposed reproductive health information to the criminal justice system. This statement is simply absurd as no women has ever been or can be charged with crime when she has an abortion under the provisions of either the Crimes Act 1961, or the Contraception Steralisation and Abortion Act 1977.

In a media release dated 23rd November 2018 he stated, “Our submission stressed that abortion engages a fundamental right inherent in bodily autonomy and self-determination.” By declaring this he is effectively stating that Abortion is a human right. This is totally incorrect. Abortion is not and never will be a ‘fundemental right’.  He also states that “Abortion also engages informational privacy rights and the expectation of privacy and confidentiality in relation to health information”.

Right to Life challenges these false and unsupported statements. It is astounding that the Commissioner who is a reputable human rights lawyer has made a statement that Right to Life believes is not supported by any law in New Zealand or by any United Nations Convention. He is using the Privacy Act to make lies acceptable and murder respectable.

It is appalling that he does not recognise the unborn child’s inalienable right to its life  and its right to privacy in its mother’s womb, its home for the first nine months of its life. This right to life and privacy is provided by the Crimes Act sections 182 and 183.

The Commissioner supports the “bodily autonomy and self-determination” of the woman, but completely ignores the right to the bodily autonomy and self-determination of the unborn. The unborn child is a separate human being with its own body, its own blood supply and its own heart and bodily systems. We should behold this new unique miracle of God’s creation with profound awe and respect. From the moment of implantation, the unborn child who is in control of the pregnancy, is totally focused on its growth and development as it prepares for birth.

It is simply appalling that our learned Commissioner supports the right of abortionists to invade the privacy of the home of the defenceless unborn child for the purpose of violently killing the child by tearing off its head, arms and legs.

Right to Life believes that the Commissioner acted unlawfully and in fact is himself in breach of the Privacy Act 1993 and its twelve privacy principles by expressing support for the decriminalisation of abortion.

Right to Life encourages the Commissioner to accept the unborn child as the weakest and most defenceless member of the human family. As a renowned human rights lawyer we ask him to not use his office as an agent of execution but to provide a noble defence of the right to life of our precious unborn and for the welfare of their mothers.

Ken Orr
Spokesperson,
Right to Life

[Read more…]

Has Andrew Little Breached the Law Commission Act 1985?

by Leave a Comment

Right to Life believes that the government has violated the functions of the Law Commission Act 1985 by actually directing the Commission to comply with a direction from government to produce a report that conforms to government policy. This is the action of a dictatorship and not a Parliamentary democracy.

The government has exploited and manipulated the Law Commission to direct it to produce recommendations on how to take abortion out of the Crimes Act and to make the killing of the unborn a health issue of choice for women.

The government has a duty to protect the human rights of all New Zealanders from conception to natural death. Why then do the Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern and the Minister of Justice, Andrew Little maintain a deafening silence in speaking up for the voiceless unborn, who are the weakest and most defenceless members of the human family? Shame on them.

The Minister of Justice in a letter to the President of the Law Commission, Sir Douglas White QC dated 27 February 2018 directed the Commission as follows, … “Accordingly, I am requesting under section 7[3] of the Law Commission Act 1985 that you prioritise a briefing to me with the Law Commission’s advice . Given our intention to propose a policy shift to treat abortion as a health issue, I would like the Law Commission’s advice on what alternative approaches could be taken in our legal framework to align with a health approach.”

[Read more…]

Is the government really concerned about violence against women?

by Leave a Comment

In the open letter to the Prime Minister on the front page of the NZ Herald on Sunday 16 December, there were calls for the government to adopt a comprehensive strategy to prevent and end violence against women and to to allocate adequete resources to, “Ensure that every woman in Aotearoa New Zealand has access to culturally appropriate domestic and sexual violence support and healing services when and where they need it”. 
Right to Life contends that an important first step to this objective is for the government to reject its current proposal to decriminalise abortion and to instead promote adoption, as an appropriate response. For surely, when lethal violence – against a pre-born (female) child – is seen as the default government funded solution to the problem of an unplanned pregnancy, then it is nothing but hypocrisy for the government to be talking about a “comprehensive strategy to prevent and end violence against women.

Right to Life fe is opposed to all violence against at women at all stages of life and fully supports this open letter. Right to Life commends the Prime Minister for opposing violence against born women but must ask why does she not recognise the killing of the unborn as violence against both women and their defenceless unborn?

New Zealand is a violent country. We have some of the worst statistics for sexual violence, domestic violence and violence against women in the OECD.

To our shame, on average thirteen women are murdered each year in New Zealand. Our Police respond to an incident of domestic abuse every five and a half minutes. Eighty per cent of domestic violence goes unreported. Why are we so violent?

Abortion is the ultimate in domestic violence and violence against women. Each and every day  35 women are violated by an abortionist and 35 unborn children are killed. In a surgical abortion, the abortionist violently forces his way into the womb of a woman for the purpose of stopping a beating heart and dismembering her child by tearing off its arms and legs. This preventable violence is sanctioned and funded by the government. The government is currently deceiving women by promoting this killing as a human right, a health service and a “reproductive health choice for women”. How many of these women are victims of male violence and are being coerced by threats of violence and abandonment? These are the men who see women as sexual objects, who are there for their gratification, men who have rejected the Creator’s plan for procreation and demand abortion as a backup for failed contraception.

New Zealand is grieving and mourning the death of Grace Millane cruelly murdered in Auckland. Her violent killing has touched the heart and conscience of the nation. A beautiful young woman with her whole life before her, trusting that she would be safe in our country, has had that trust shattered as she is taken from us on the eve of her twenty-second birthday. This is an appalling tragedy.

But so is the fact that every day in New Zealand an estimated eighteen women are violently killed in their mother’s womb.

Right to Life believes that the fundamental reason for violence against women by men is because women are increasingly sexualised as objects of male gratification. Women have an intrinsic dignity conferred on them by their Creator as the creator of new life. Mothers are the heart of the home for the natural family, comprising exclusively one man and one woman. It is the duty of men to be the protector of women and children. When men lose respect for women and see them as sexual objects, there for their gratification, respect quickly turns to violence and abandonment.

Ken Orr
Spokesperson,
Right to Life

Seymour Struggling to Save his Contentious Euthanasia Bill

by Leave a Comment

Members of Parliament should not be seduced by David Seymour’s proposed ammendments to his euthanasia bill. Right to Life contends that Seymour knew from the outset that in order to get any Euthanasia bill across the line he had to ‘shoot for the stars’ in order to ‘get to the moon’. He knows that once any Euthanasia bill is enacted in Parliament, then it will be only a matter of time before the criteria for those eligible for euthansia death will be widened. Here has always been the danger to the vulnerable inherent in any change to our current Crimes Act legislation. Man is a pragmatic creature and in an increasingly secular society, that has no foundation of objective morality, pragmatic measures will soon see safeguards eroded, with an ever widening class of persons eligible to be killed by a ‘doctor’.  

David Seymour made the astounding statement on TV One News tonight (Thursday 13th December), that following his proposed amendments, there was now no reason that the Hon Maggie Barry – who has recently submitted a Private Members palliative care bill to the ballot – should not support his bill. Such a statement shows a complete lack of understanding of why she and others oppose any euthansia bill, which permits doctors to kill their patients.

Right to Life commends Members of Parliament for protecting the vulnerable in our community by opposing his End of Life Choice bill currently with the Justice Select Committee. They are encouraged to avoid being enticed to support this bill by the seductive amendments now being proposed. 

Right to Life is delighted that David Seymour has now recognised that the majority of Members of Parliament are opposed to his EOLCB and that his bill will suffer an ignoble defeat at its second reading in March. This bill is poorly drafted and is a threat to the most vulnerable members of our community, the aged, the disabled and the seriously ill.

David Seymour should also recognise that the majority of New Zealanders are fiercely opposed to his contentious bill. A careful analysis of the more than 36,000 written submissions to the Justice Committee is being conducted by the Care Alliance This undertaking is not complete but to date it reveals that 92 per cent are opposed to the bill. The Justice Committee has a moral obligation to finalise its report back to Parliament reflecting the overwhelming opposition to this dangerous bill expressed by the public in their submissions.

David Seymour is desperate to save his bill and is now proposing three amendments:

For Parliament to allow doctors to kill only those in a terminal condition or to assist in their suicide and to exclude patients who have a mental health condition.

To include support for the Palliative Care bill of the Hon, Maggie Barry.

David Seymour does not understand that the bill is fundamentally flawed because it undermines the total prohibition against the taking of innocent human life, which is the foundation of the law and medicine.

There is no amendment that can be made to this bill that will make it acceptable.


Right to Life earnestly requests that the media which should be at the service of the community, now withdraw support for this dangerous bill. The media have an important role in protecting our community by upholding and defending the prohibition of the medical profession to care for their patients and not to kill them.

Ken Orr
Spokesperson,
Right to Life

Why are late term unborn babies being killed unlawfully in New Zealand

by 4 Comments

There is a massive and disturbing discrepancy between the number of late term abortions reported by the Abortion Supervisory Committee [ASC] and the number reported by the Perinatal and Maternal Mortality Review Committee [PMMRC].

The ASC in its 2017 report to Parliament advised that there were 76 abortions post 20 weeks reported in 2016. The PMMRC advised in its 2017 report that there were 148 post 20 weeks reported for the 2016 calendar year. There is an unexplained difference of 72. This raises very important questions.

It is a statutory duty for abortionists in New Zealand to report all abortions to the ASC and in addition to report all post 20 week abortions to the PMMRC. Right to Life believes that the 72 abortions not reported to the ASC were done to hide the fact that these abortions were unlawful and that these unborn children were killed unlawfully. This is a crime against humanity. [Read more…]

Andrew Little’s Campaign of Misinformation is a Threat to Women and the Unborn

by Leave a Comment

Image result for andrew littleThe Minister of Justice is responsible for the administration of the Crimes Act which provides legal protection for the right to life of every member of the community from implantation in the womb to natural death. It is his privilege and duty to ensure that all are equal before the law.

Right to Life is disappointed that at the direction of the Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern the Minister is conducting an unprecedented campaign to remove women and their unborn from the protection of the Crimes Act, under the pretext that the killing of the unborn should no longer be a crime. This proposal is unjust, a violation of the human rights of the mother and her child and is highly offensive and insulting to women. 

The Minister in response to an Official Information Act request dated 28 September 2018 from Right to Life, asked three important questions. He responded on 2nd November. Here are our questions and his responses;

We asked, “What evidence do you have to support your government’s contention that it should no longer be a crime to kill an unborn child in an abortion?”

The Minister had no evidence but said, ”I have publicly expressed my personal view that abortion should be treated as a health issue.” How dare the Minister declare that the killing of a child in the womb is not a crime but rather a “reproductive choice for women.” How dare he decide such a critical and consequential change to our laws, put in place to protect the unborn child, be removed because it is his personal opion. How dare he direct the Law Commission to investigate how to remove abortion from the Crimes Act, without also directing the Commission to fully investigate the consequences and to determine whether such a move was in the country’s best interests. How dare Jacinda Ardern use her privileged position as the Prime Minister of this country to drive her personal aganda to destroy the protection in law afforded to our unborn children. This proposal is a serious and grave injustice, which cannot go unchallenged.

It is an immutable truth upheld by the human race since the beginning of time that from conception, the child has an inalienable right to life.  It is totally unacceptable for the Prime Minister to direct the Minister of Jusitice to proceed to remove women and their unborn from the protection of the Crimes Act, in order to facilitate the killing of the unborn as a health issue of choice for women.

When Right to Life asked Little, “What evidence do you have that women are treated like criminals?”,

He replied: – “Abortion is unlawful unless it is lawful. An abortion in accordance with the Contraception Sterilisation and Abortion Act is effectively a defence to what would otherwise be a crime under the Crimes Act 1961. Section 44 of the Contraception Sterilisation and Abortion Act criminalise women who ‘procure their own miscarriage,’ making them liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $200.”

This section of the Crimes Act, is there to protect women from being violated by another person with an instrument with the intention of killing the child in her womb. A breach of this Act is an offence, it is not a crime. Why is the Minister trying to intimidate women by calling it a crime? The killing of an unborn child in an abortion is always a serious crime. Section 187A of the Crimes Act provides for protection of doctors from prosecution, if they exercise honest belief in the limited grounds for an authorisation of an abortion, set out in that section.

When we asked Little, “What evidence do you have that women considering an abortion are not treated with care, dignity and respect?”

The Minister replied, I am refusing your request as the information requested does not exist. Why does the Minister make serious claims for which he has no supporting evidence? The Minister’s false claim is disparaging of health professionals and it infers that the only way to treat women with care dignity and respect is to speedily provide for the violent killing of the unborn child when requested.

How do we show respect and care for women by killing their children? When will our politicians wake up to the fact that his proposal will certainly be harmful to and not in the best interest of the unborn children of this country or their mothers.

Right to Life believes that Andrew Little is failing badly in his duty and is being negligent in not giving consideration to the findings of the Royal Commission on Contraception, Steralisation and Abortion appointed by the Labour government in 1975.

Ken Orr
Spokesperson,
Right to Life

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