Right to Life New Zealand

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

Is Stuff anti-life and anti-feminist?

by 3 Comments

Is Stuff anti-life and anti-feminist?

Media Release 15 December 2021

Right to Life is concerned that Stuff, the owner of many newspapers in New Zealand, is unfairly criticising Christopher Luxon, the leader of the National Party for being opposed to the violent killing of the unborn and the vulnerable by assisted suicide and euthanasia.

 Andrea Vance , a highly respected senior journalist at Stuff, recently wrote ” Luxon’s views speak volumes about a disdainful attitude to women.” She accused him of being a fundamentalist and states, “He claims to be pro-life, a phrase American conservatives use to cloak the underlying misogyny of anti-abortion legislation.”

New Zealand needs leaders of political parties and Members of Parliament who have a fundamental belief in the sanctity of  every human being from conception to natural death.

Stuff should be celebrating that Christopher Luxon

  • Believes that human life begins at conception and that every child is endowed by its Creator with an inalienable right to life.
  • Believes it is always wrong to kill another innocent human being, especially the violent killing of defenceless and innocent unborn children.
  • Believes that the poisoning and the suctioning of the child or its violent dismemberment in its mother’s womb is murder and a crime and not in the words of Jacinda Ardern “a reproductive choice for women.” When asked on Newshub on 1st December to confirm if abortion is tantamount to murder, he said: “That’s what a pro-life position is.”

Right to Life believes that abortion is violence against women and that women deserve respect, love and help to choose life for their child.

Andrea Vance is a distinguished and highly acclaimed journalist who mistakenly believes that her views are feminist. Authentic feminism is inclusive, non-violent and protective of children. More than 12,000 children are violently killed every year in New Zealand with more than 6,000 being female. If Andrea is really a feminist, why does she not support their right to be born?

Right to Life questions Stuff’s impartiality being aware that the government recently gave $55 million to the media to promote “responsible journalism.“

Stuff’s website states: “Our journalism will remain free from political or commercial influence as our company charter enshrines, Stuff’s source of revenue does not affect impartiality or objectivity of our journalists , the investigations we undertake or how we scrutinise the powerful.” 

There is a disturbing and declining trust in the media revealed in a recent poll conducted by the Auckland University. There is an urgent need for the media to regain this trust by promoting equality and by defending the right to life of all New Zealanders from conception and to support political leaders and Members of Parliament who defend our God given right to life.

Ken Orr,

Spokesperson,

Right to Life N.Z. Inc.

Right to Life Seeks Informed Debate on Euthanasia Referendum

by Leave a Comment

Media Release 25 July 2020

Right to Life commends David Seymour, the architect and sponsor of the End of Life Choice Act for insisting that the public be given accurate information on the purpose of his legislation. He stated on TVNZ One News on Tuesday 21st July, his concern that there was a danger that what he wrongly considered inaccurate  important questions in a recent poll by Horizon could misinform the electorate.

  Right to Life supports David Seymour in his desire to ensure that voters are fully informed on the legislation that will empower doctors to give a lethal injection to their patients or assist in their suicide.

  Right to Life believes that David Seymour would be greatly distressed to learn that a poll conducted by Curia marketing in 2017 found that the majority of respondents thought that the End of Life Choice Bill would provide options that were already legal.

•       85% thought that it included turning off life support

•       79% thought it includes ‘do not resuscitate’ (no CPR) requests

•       67% thought it includes the stopping of medical tests, treatments and surgeries.

Similar results were found in polls conducted in 2015 and 2019.

The End of Life Choice Act is NOT about, nor does it make legal the action of turning off life support, to make a ‘do not resuscitate request (no CPR) or to stop medical treatment. All of these end of life choices are already legal, are not euthanasia and this new law, if passed, will not change these actions.

The End of Life Choice Act is NOT about pain relief. It’s already legal for a doctor to give a person enough medication to address their pain and make them comfortable, even if this may hasten their death as a side effect as the doctor seeks to neither  hasten or cause the death of his patient.

This poll demonstrates that the public is not yet aware of the content and meaning of the End of Life Choice Act. We believe that in order to have a fully informed public referendum on this critical issue of allowing doctors to give patients a lethal injection or to assist in their suicide it is essential that the above information be widely publicised by the media and shown on the government referendum web site.

Right to Life believes that David Seymour, who is a passionate advocate for choice has a serious duty to the community to make a public statement to the media confirming that the EOLCA does not provide any of the above options. We believe that David Seymour would be greatly distressed if voters voted Yes for the euthanasia referendum in the mistaken belief that the legislation provided for the above options which are already ethical, legal and have been available for many years.

Right to Life requests that the media,which are at the service of the community seek from David Seymour his confirmation that the above options are not provided for in the End of Life Choice Act.

Ken Orr

Spokesperson,

Right to Life

Authorised by Paul Ives, 22C McBrattneys Rd, Dallington, Christchurch 8061

Right to Life Presents Petition Opposing Abortion Decriminalisation

by Leave a Comment

Right to Life Petition opposing Decriminalisation of Abortion Presented to MP’s.

A national petition, signed by 15,407 concerned citizens opposing the decriminalisation of abortion was presented at a short ceremony at Parliament at 12.30 pm on Wednesday 20th November. It is believed to be the largest petition from residents of New Zealand to our Parliament on the issue of abortion. The petition organised by Right to Life was presented to Simon O’Connor MP by Fleur Utting and Philip Creed vice President of RTL.

The people attending were Philip Creed, Fleur Utting, Mary Pollard, Monica Devine and  Martin Frauenstein. The MPs present were Simon O’Connor, Alfred Ngaro, Chris Penk, Paulo Garcia and  Hariata Hipango,

Below is a transcript of the presentation made by Vice President Philip Creed to the MP’s.

Thank you for being here today to receive us. Right to Life applauds you for your courageous defence of life in opposing the Abortion Legislation Bill and the End of Life Choice Bill. Be assured that you have our total support in defending life.

We all have a duty to defend life. We are here today to present a petition to our Parliament to maintain the protection of the Crimes Act for women and for our precious unborn children. We recognise that every unborn child is a unique and unrepeatable miracle of God’s loving creation that is endowed at conception with an inalienable right to life. May our Parliament respond to our petition to protect women and the unborn from the violence of abortion.

We believe that this is the largest petition ever made by residents of New Zealand to Parliament on the issue of abortion, on the care of women and concerning the killing of the unborn child.

It is our privilege today to present to you a petition signed by 15,407 concerned citizens opposing the decriminalisation of abortion and supporting protection for women and the unborn provided by the Crimes Act.

This petition was organised by Right to Life. This petition defends our inalienable  right to life, the foundation of our human rights. Since 1856 the Crimes Act, section 182, Killing unborn child, has recognised that the killing of an innocent and defenceless unborn child is a serious crime. This petition is opposed to abortion being taken out of the Crimes Act and made “a reproductive choice for women.”

The proposal of the Prime Minister to decriminalise abortion is an unprecedented attack on the sanctity of life of the unborn child. An attack on the right to life of the unborn is an attack on the right to life of us all. It is a denial that the unborn child is a human being endowed at conception with human rights. It is a rejection of the responsibility of the State to protect the lives of all New Zealanders from conception to natural death. Under the government’s proposal the child is to be declared the property of the mother. This is slavery and no person has the right to claim ownership of another person. If today Parliament can declare that the unborn child is not a human being, tomorrow Parliament may declare that other vulnerable human beings, those with dementia and Alzheimer’s are no longer human beings and protection for the lives such persons may be removed from the Crimes Act and killed and declared a health service.
The government have no mandate to declare that the unborn are not human beings and that they have no right to have their lives protected by the State.

in September Right to life employed Curia Marketing Services to conduct a survey.

One question asked when the unborn child became a human being

  • 65% said before birth.
  • 25 % said at conception,
  • 14 % said at implantation
  •  26 % said between implantation and birth.

A second question asked when should the human rights of the unborn child be protected by New Zealand law

  • 17 % believed at conception,
  • 10 % at implantation
  • 28 % between implantation and birth.

This shows 55% of New Zealanders believe that the unborn child’s right to life should be protected at some stage before birth.

Why then is our governments removing instead of ensuring protection for our precious unborn?

Petition Advocating protection for Women and their Unborn Children to be presented at Parliament

by Leave a Comment

Media Release 18 November 2019

What is believed to be the largest petition ever made by residents of New Zealand to Parliament on the issue of abortion, on the care of women and concerning the killing of the unborn child.

A petition signed by 15,407 concerned citizens opposing the decriminalisation of abortion and supporting protection for women and the unborn is to be formally presented to an assembly of invited MP’s on the steps of Parliament on Wednesday 20th November at 12 30 p.m.

The petition was organised by Right to Life and will be presented by representatives of the Society’s executive.

This petition defends our inalienable  right to life, the foundation of our human rights. Since 1856 the Crimes Act, section 182, Killing an unborn child, has recognised that the killing of an innocent and defenceless unborn child is a serious crime. This petition is opposed to abortion being taken out of the Crimes Act and made “a reproductive choice for women.”

The proposal of the Prime Minister to decriminalise abortion is an unprecedented attack on the sanctity of life of the unborn child. It is a denial that the unborn child is a human being endowed at conception with human rights. It is a rejection of the responsibility of the State to protect the lives of all New Zealanders from conception to natural death. Under the government’s proposal the child is to be declared the property of the mother. This is slavery and no person has the right to claim ownership of another person. If today Parliament can declare that the unborn child is not a human being, tomorrow Parliament may declare that other vulnerable human beings, those with dementia and Alzheimer’s are no longer human beings and protection for such persons may be removed from the Crimes Act and killed and declared a health service.

The government have no mandate to declare that the unborn are not human beings and that they have no right to have their lives protected by the State. A poll conducted by Curia Marketing Services in September on behalf of Right to Life found that 65% of those polled believed that the unborn child was a human being before birth, with 25 % at conception, 14 % at implantation and 26 % between implantation and birth.
On a second question, when should the human rights of the unborn child be protected by New Zealand law, 17 % believed at conception, 10 % at implantation and 28 % between implantation and birth. In other words 55% of New Zealanders believe that the unborn child’s right to life should be protected at some stage before birth. WHY then is our governments removing instead of ensuring protection for our precious unborn?

The presentation of this petition is a public event and the media are most welcome to attend.

Ken Orr,
Spokesperson,
Right to Life

Poll Reveals Government has no Mandate to Impose Radical Abortion on our Nation

by Leave a Comment

Media Release 19th Sep 2019

The New Zealand government has no mandate to declare that abortion does not kill a human being with a right to life.

Neither does the government have a mandate to declare that abortion is not a crime and should be taken out of the Crimes Act.

Nor does the government have a mandate to declare that abortion is “a reproductive choice for women.”

A poll recently conducted by Curia Market Research on behalf of Right to Life reveals that the government has no mandate from the people of New Zealand to impose its radical Abortion Legislation Bill on the nation. The results emphatically reject the uninformed opinion of the Minister of Justice when he denied the humanity of the unborn child and its right to life. made in his address on the 8th August in presenting his radical anti-life Abortion bill. Andrew Little said;

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

The poll was conducted between Monday 26 August and Tuesday 10 September 2019. The sample population was aged 18 or older who were contactable by a landline or mobile phone. 1,000 respondents agreed to participate.

There were two questions asked, the first, “at what stage do you personally believe a fertilized egg becomes a human being. Choose from the following options?

At the time of conception when the egg is fertilised by sperm.
At the time of implantation when the embryo attaches to the womb.
At some point between implantation and birth.
At birth.

Results*

TimeCount%
Conception24825
Implantation14514
Between implantation & Birth26526
Birth11311
Unsure or refuse to answer23323
Total1004100

A total of 65% of the respondents believed that the unborn child became a human being between conception and prior to birth.

The second question was: – At what stage do you believe the human rights of the unborn child should be protected by New Zealand law? Answer from the following options;

At the time of conception when the egg is fertilised by sperm.
At the time of implantation when the embryo attaches to the womb.
At some point between implantation and birth.
At birth.

Results*

TimeCount%
Conception 16917
Implantation 9610
Between implantation & Birth 27728
Birth 15716
Unsure or refuse to answer 30530
Total1004100

A total of 55% of respondents believed that the human rights of the unborn child should be protected between conception and prior to birth. This refutes the proposal of the me Minister that abortion should be taken out of the Crimes Act.
The results of this poll are very similar to the results of a poll conducted in 1997 with the same questions on behalf of Right to Life.

Of those who had an opinion 51% believe that a fertilized egg becomes a human being at conception or implantation and 65% believe that the new human life becomes a human being between conception but before birth. This finding reveals that a substantial majority of New Zealanders oppose the opinion of the Minister of Justice and the Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern, that abortion does not kill a human being.

Of those who had an opinion 77 percent believe that the human rights of the unborn should be protected by New Zealand law between conception but before birth. Again this finding reveals that the vast majority of New Zealanders oppose the opinion of the Minister of Justice and the Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern that our abortion laws should be liberalised.

*Note rounding of the firgues mean the percentages do not tally to exactly 100 percent.

Ken Orr,
Spokesperson,
Right to Life

                                                               

Why is NZ First Betraying its Supporters?

by 1 Comment

Media Release Wednesday 15th May 2019

Right to Life is appalled that NZ First is deserting its support base by giving critical support to the ant-life and anti- feminist agenda of the Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern and the Minister of Justice, Andrew Little.

Andrew Little has been directed by the Prime Minister to present a government bill to take the killing of the unborn out of the Crimes Act and to make the killing health care and “a reproductive choice for women”. The support of Winston Peters and his caucus for this proposed bill is absolutely critical for without this support the Labour Party would not be able to proceed with the proposed anti -feminist and anti-life bill, it would have the ignominious fate that this bill deserves.

The stunning betrayal by NZ First of the women of New Zealand and our precious unborn is unparalleled in the history of New Zealand. It is a declaration:

  • That the State has no duty to protect the lives of New Zealanders in their first nine months of life 
  • That the killing of an unborn child is not a crime 
  •  that it is a woman’s right to choose to terminate the life of her child for any reason up to 22 weeks, effectively up to birth if a doctor thinks that it is appropriate
  • That sex selection abortions should be legal.

At the 2017 general election NZ First received 186,706 party votes which was 7.2 % of the total party votes. In a Reid Research poll conducted in February 2019, NZ First received 2.9 % support from those polled. On current polling NZ First would be expected to have NO Members of Parliament elected at the 2020 general election.

A poll of a 1,000 respondents conducted by Curia Market Research on behalf of Family First in December 2017 revealed that 96% of NZ First voters were opposed to sex selection abortions. That 38% were opposed to abortions being performed after 15 weeks and a further 10 % were opposed to abortions being done at all. 73 % were opposed to abortions and wanted them reduced.

Right to Life now asks, how is Winston Peters going to convince the electorate that the killing of the unborn child is no longer a crime and is to be “a reproductive choice for women”? Why should the electorate trust Winston Peters to protect women and the unborn when he had stated publicly in 2014 that he was opposed to the decriminalisation of abortion and now in 2019 that he supports the decriminalisation of abortion?

It is still not too late. Right to Life earnestly requests that Winston Peters take the mantle of statesman and stand on the high moral ground by courageously reaffirming his opposition to the decriminalisation of abortion and withdrawing his support for the anti-life agenda of the Labour Party and the proposed evil bill to decriminalise abortion. This could be his finest hour when he becomes the defender of women and our precious unborn.

Ken Orr
Spokesperson,
Right to Life

Shock Poll: NZ’ers Want Stricter Limits on Abortion

by Leave a Comment

The following post is a media-release from Family First 21st January 2018

An independent poll of New Zealanders by Curia Market Research has found significant support for greater time limits on abortion, including from those who generally support abortion. There was surprisingly small support for the current Crimes Act time limit of 20 weeks, and overwhelming rejection of any extension to the limit. There was also strong support for legal safeguards.

“These results confirm that the Labour government has no mandate at all to liberalise the abortions laws. The vast majority of the population – including people who generally support abortion – show strong support and acceptance of the current legal framework and the presence of safeguards around issues such as coercion, licensing of providers, and informed consent,” says Marina Young, spokesperson for Family First NZ.

In the independent poll of 1,013 NZ’ers in December, 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), as proposed by pro-abortion group ALRANZ. 50% think the time limit should be shorter than the current 20 weeks, and a further 36% were unsure. Of those who did pick a time limit, 15 weeks was the median choice, according to Curia.

Significantly, 56% of women think the time limit should be less than the current 20 weeks. And 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.

Other results include:

  • 65% of respondents agree that society should work together to reduce the number of abortions (only 17% disagree). Of those who generally supportabortion, 63% agree with reducing the number of abortions (19% disagree). 74% of women agree (56% of men).
  • 86% support the current legal requirements of providers and premises having to be licensed (only 8% disagree). Of those who generally support abortion, 92% support these legal requirements. 95% of women agree (78% of men).
  • 90% oppose sex selective abortions (Only 4% support). Women are 94% opposed, and 91% of those who generally support abortion are opposed.
  • 76% support doctors being required to verify a woman seeking an abortion is not under any coercion from a 3rd party (8% opposed). Women are 83% in support (men 69%). Of those who generally support abortion, 84% support this legal requirement.
  • 52% say they generally support abortion and 29% oppose, 19% unsure. However, opposition to abortion exceeds support of abortion in areas of high deprivation (39% to 35%). NZ First voters are least supportive, Green voters most supportive.
  • 49% support being able to have an abortion just because a woman doesn’t want to be a mother (38% opposed, 13% unsure). Respondents in high areas of deprivation are evenly split on the issue. Green voters most supportive (73%), NZ First voters least supportive (38%).
  • Women are more pro-life then men on most of the issues canvassed.

Earlier surveys – also carried out by Curia Market Research – have found:

  • A 2016 survey asked respondents whether they agreed with the following statement: “Women who have abortions risk harming their mental health as a result of the abortion.” Overall, 46% agreed with the statement, 21% were unsure or didn’t say, and only 33% disagreed. Significantly, strongest agreement with the statement came from the younger 18-40 age bracket (50%).
  • A 2011 poll found that the majority of New Zealanders (64%) believe that women considering an abortion have the right to be fully informed of the medical risks of abortion – and the alternatives.
  • A 2010 poll found that 79% of respondents think parents should be notified if their daughter aged under 16 is seeking an abortion. And a 2011 poll of 600 teenagers (15-21) nationwide found that 59% of young respondents thought the parents should be told if their school-age daughter is considering getting an abortion, so long as it won’t put her in physical danger. 56% of youth respondents also said they believe an unborn child or foetus has a right to be born. Slightly more young women than young men agreed – 58% to 55%.

“Contrary to misrepresentation by pro-abortion groups, New Zealand women are either satisfied with the current regulation of abortion or want it made more restrictive. Women are not made criminals by the current legislative guidelines and protections. To claim otherwise is simply false scaremongering aimed at deceiving people into supporting the introduction of an extreme abortion law in New Zealand. The existing safeguards are there to protect women from unlicensed premises and coercion, and they are ones most New Zealanders support.”

“Our concern is that taking away the current safeguards will simply result in women being rushed or pressured into abortions that they don’t actually want, and which the current system helps to protect against. Coercion to have an abortion is a big issue for some women,” says Mrs Young.

The latest nationwide poll was carried out during December and has a margin of error of +/- 3.1%.

ENDS

 (Marina had an abortion in 1986 and now speaks about and promotes abortion healing through the Buttons Project (established in 2008) – which offers counselling, networking, and support programmes.)

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