Right to Life New Zealand

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

Formal Complaint Susan Strongman Article – Radio New Zealand

by Leave a Comment

Susan Strongman RNZ Journalist

Manager,
Radio NZ,

Dear Sir,

Formal Complaint.

I wish to lodge a formal complaint against two articles written by Susan Strongman and published on 5th and 6th September. I believe that the articles breached Article I Accuracy, Fairness and Balance of the Media Council.

The articles demonstrate a biased preference for women killing their babies before birth.  It is disappointing for our community that relies on Radio NZ for unbiased and accurate news and information to be presented with misleading information on a very important human rights issue. Radio NZ is a publicly funded broadcaster that is at the service of the community. I believe that Radio NZ should as a matter of public policy on highly contentious issues such as abortion, adopt a strictly neutral stance.

These inflammatory articles reflect support for women killing their children before birth. It would appear that a considerable amount of time and expense has been devoted to preparing these two major articles attacking Pregnancy Counselling Service (PCS) and Crisis Pregnancy Support (CPS). This suggests that Radio NZ has taken a position in support of the pro-death lobby which supports women having the right to kill their children before birth as a “reproductive choice for women.”

Your journalist has conveyed the message:-

  • That women would be better served if these two counselling services did not exist.
  • That the counselling services are failing women by not encouraging them to kill their children before birth.
  • That these counselling services should not be receiving funding from COGS, because they are involved in political and religious activities.
  • That the women providing counselling are not qualified to provide counselling, that they provide biased and misleading counselling.
  • That there is no need for these counselling services as professional pregnancy counselling is provided free by District Health Boards.

The writer describes the counselling services as “anti-abortionist” this is the offensive and derogatory term used by the pro-death movement to denigrate and dismiss those who are opposed to the violent killing of unborn children who are the weakest and most defenceless members of the human family. The writer refuses to acknowledge that these counsellors are passionate in defending the lives of our unborn and the health and welfare of their mothers by refusing to use the term pro-life to describe them.

It is acknowledged that DHBs provide pregnancy counselling services. This service is available Monday to Friday during working hours. Women should have the right to have a choice as from whom they are going to seek help and counselling. PCS and CPS are available 24/7 and are ready day and night to provide comfort and support to vulnerable women in their hour of need. The DHB pregnancy counsellors are an integral part of the abortion industry and have a priority to reassure women that abortion is a health service which removes the contents of the uterus which is just a collection of cells. There is no baby involved in abortion as human life only begins at birth.

DHBs pregnancy counsellors provide only counselling and that, in the Board’s offices. PCS & CPS will provide counselling where ever the woman requests it. They will also provide bassinettes, baby clothes and other necessities. This practical help is not available from DHBs.
The writer claims that PCS & CPS should not receive funding from COGS because they are involved in political and religious activity. It is the democratic right of every citizen and organisation to make submissions to Parliamentary Select Committees. There is no prohibition on these organisations receiving financial donations from religious bodies.

The writer is attacking these counselling services for doing exactly what the pro-death lobby consistently accuses us of not doing, which is providing genuine care and options to pregnant women in need. This is in contrast with Family Planning who claim to help women but would not provide any practical help to women who courageously choose life for their baby.

Your writer is critical of Dr Joseph Hassan of Nelson who is following his conscience by declining to prescribe the contraceptive pill to his female patients. He does this because he knows that the contraceptive pill causes the death of human embryos and is dangerous to women’s health. The Contraception Sterilisation and Abortion Act 1977, section 46, Conscientious Objection.

The writer depicts a lack of balance in quoting well known pro-abortionist Professor Liz Beddoe of Auckland who is predictably scathing in her attack of PCS & CPS. It is noted that the writer has not quoted from any person who is supportive of PCS & CPS.

Radio NZ would be providing a service to women if they recognised the wonderful help that is provided in New Zealand by the caring compassionate women volunteers of PCS & CPS to women who are facing an unplanned pregnancy. These women are often alone, exploited and coerced with threats of violence and abandonment if they don’t destroy the child in their womb. These organisations need increased funding, not less, if they are to provide the help that women deserve to receive.

Your writer genuinely believes that we help women by helping them to kill their children, we don’t. Women who have an abortion are faced with a lifetime of grief, sorrow and regret. A woman seeking an abortion is making a cry for help. Women do not desire an abortion like a woman seeking an ice cream cone or a Porsche but like an animal that is gnawing its leg off which is caught in a trap.

Radio NZ is doing a great disservice to women in New Zealand by attacking women who belong to PCS & CPS and who volunteer their time, energy and resources to help women in their hour of need. They deserve to be applauded, not attacked.

Yours sincerely,

Ken Orr
Secretary,
Right to Life

Why is Jacinda Ardern Seeking to Impose Capital Punishment on the Unborn as a Reproductive Health Choice for Women?

by Leave a Comment

The method of execution in New Zealand of murderers under capital punishment prior to 1961 was by hanging, relatively quick. However the most common method of execution for the unborn these days is by surgical dismemberment, which entails violently and painfully tearing off the arms, legs and head off the victim. The bodies of the accused are then treated as “medical waste” and are disposed of at the local land fill.

The Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern is passionate and driven in her desire to reinforce capital punishment not for brutal and violent rapists and murderers, but for the defenceless and innocent unborn who have been found guilty of a more serious crime, the crime of being “unwanted”. Capital punishment is being reaffirmed and reformed by taking abortion out of the Crimes Act and making Capital punishment for the unborn, health care and “a reproductive choice for women”.

The Prime Minister supports the abolition of Capital punishment for rapists and murderers; why then is she determined to retain and extend Capital punishment for the unborn who are the most innocent and defenceless members of our human family.

Right to Life is determined that should the Labour led government  present an abortion bill to Parliament, we will ensure that the state funded execution of our children will be a major issue at the next general election.

The Prime Minister confirmed her opposition to the death penalty in the media on 2 April 2019. “New Zealand has always stood against the death penalty, in all its forms, for any reason”. The government is a leading voice in the United Nations for the abolition of Capital Punishment. Excuse me Prime Minister, why then are you personally promoting, funding and indeed driving the legislation which will effectively remove all protections for the unborn and result in the ongoing execution every year of more than 12,000 innocent children?

Family Planning and other vocal advocates for capital punishment for the unborn insist that the process be accessible and that the sentence be carried out without delay, all the while disguising this mass execution as “a reproductive health choice for women” and as health care. Right to Life is determined to oppose this Labour government led genocide.


Capital punishment for murder was removed from the statute books in 1961. There was a total of 85 convicted criminals executed in New Zealand between 1842 and 1957. New Zealand still retains the death penalty for its unborn children. Since 1977, the government has presided over the execution and killing of more than 500,000 innocent and defenceless unborn children who were found guilty of being “unwanted.” Being an unwanted unborn child in New Zealand effectively, is more often than not, a capital offence and means that, more than likely you will be subject to the death penalty.

For the unborn being unwanted is a serious crime, punishable by death. The sentence is imposed by doctors appointed by the Abortion Supervisory Committee, the trial is brief, no witnesses are called in the defence of the child and the sentence of death is carried out as quickly as possible; in a Public Hospital. The executions are authorised and funded by the government.

The government continues to delude itself in believing that it has an admirable and exemplary human rights record. The truth is that the government’s hands are covered in the blood of our aborted children and the consciences of our politicians must share in the guilt for this bloodshed and for the grief and sorrow inflicted on the poor mothers, the second victims of abortion.

Ken Orr,
Spokesperson,
Right to Life

Letter to Winston Peters and NZ First MP’s

by 3 Comments

11 July 2019

Rt. Hon. Winston Peters MP,

Dear Minister,

I am writing to you in defence of our precious unborn and their mothers who are under an unprecedented attack.

The State has a serious duty to protect the lives of all members of the human family. The option preferred by the Minister of Justice would remove this protection.  It is contended that in upholding your commendable policy opposing the decriminalisation of abortion and acting in the best interests of the unborn and their mothers, NZ First should refrain from supporting this bill through cabinet and oppose the bill at its first and any subsequent readings. Any bill that seeks to make the killing of the defenceless unborn “a reproductive health service” represents an unprecedented attack on the sanctity of life.  

Right to Life commends NZ First for its defence of the lives of our precious unborn and their mothers. We are aware that NZ First is the only party in Parliament that has a policy to oppose the decriminalisation of abortion. I recall that at the Family First Conference in Auckland in 2014 when you were interviewed by Bob McCoskrie, you stated that “abortions should be legal, safe and rare”. You were asked if you supported the Green’s policy of decriminalising abortion, you replied “no we don’t”. You then said that you believed that life began at conception and that the child had a right to life.

It is reported in the media that your caucus is committed to supporting a bill through cabinet that would remove the killing of the unborn by abortion from the Crimes Act and make the killing of the unborn “a reproductive choice for women”. It is the wish of the Prime Minister to remove the stigma associated with the killing of the unborn and to make the killing of the child no longer a crime, but a health service.

The sanctity of life of the unborn and its right to life are protected under the Crimes Act section 182 Killing unborn child and section 183 Procuring abortion by any means. It is a serious crime to kill a child in the womb. Every- one who violates these sections is liable to imprisonment for up to 14 years. This legal protection has been there since 1856, we change it at our peril. 

The Royal Commission in its report to Parliament in 1977 said, on 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. Evidence was given to us by eminent scientists from all over the world. None of them suggested that human life begins at any other time than at conception.” In rejecting the argument that some degree of development should be reached before the unborn child be accorded status, the Commission said, “If some stage of physical or mental development has to be accepted as indicating whether or not human life is in being, so a stage may be reached at the other end of life where a person who has become senile or has lost consciousness may be disposed of.”

The unborn child is the weakest and most defenceless member of the human family and needs special legal protection. Every day in New Zealand nearly thirty-five children in the womb are violently destroyed and their mothers the second victim of abortion, are left with a life time of grief and sorrow. Our women deserve better.

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.

If we as a society deny the humanity of the unborn, then logically we will one day deny the humanity of those who are suffering from dementia and Alzheimer’s. The denial of the humanity and right to life of the unborn is a threat to the right to life of every citizen.

The decriminalisation of abortion will;

  • Allow for sex selection abortions, which are currently unlawful.
  • Allow for abortion up to birth for babies with a disabiliy including Down Syndrome.
  • Not protect women seeking an abortion because they are subject to violence and coercion.

In conclusion, Right to Life requests that you withdraw support for the decriminalisation of abortion and that you use your influence to have the current unlawful abortion on demand stopped. Please promote adoption as a loving option.

Thank you for all that you are doing to defend life, protecting women from the violence of abortion and promoting the common good.

Yours sincerely,

Ken Orr

Secretary.

Child Poverty Begins in the Womb

by 1 Comment

Media Release Monday 8th July 2019

Why is the Prime Minister ignoring the poverty of children in the womb?
Since she became Prime Minister nearly 19,000 innocent and defenceless children have been violently killed in their mother’s womb.

Right to Life commends the Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern who is also the Minister for Child Poverty Reduction for her passionate commitment to reduce child poverty in New Zealand. Why then is she ignoring the utter poverty of unwanted unborn children, our most vulnerable children?

The Prime Minister stated in an opinion article that she wrote for Children’s Day 3rd March 2019, “one of our goals and aspirations as a Government is to make New Zealand the best place in the world to be a child, but we can always do more. The way we treat children, says so much about what kind of country we are.”

Right to Life agrees and asks then what sort of country are we when the government authorises and funds the violent killing of an average of 35 children every day? Why too does the Prime Minister discriminate against our unborn children the most vulnerable of our children? Human life begins at conception; at the moment of conception, a new human being, a child, the weakest and most defenceless member of the human family is created. That child is a unique and unrepeatable miracle of God’s loving creation.

Why does the Prime Minister not recognise that the greatest poverty that could be inflicted on a child is to be violently deprived of life before it is born?  This is a crime against humanity and a burden on the conscience of the nation.

The Prime Minister in 2018 introduced the Child Poverty Reduction bill which had as its objective to encourage a focus on child poverty reduction and provide a commitment by Government to address child well-being. The bill was passed in December 2018. There is no provision in this Act to recognise the poverty inflicted on unborn children.

It is the duty of government not only to reduce child poverty but to prohibit the killing of children both born and unborn.The Prime Minister however, who believes that smacking a child is a crime, believes that killing an unborn child should not be a crime and should be a “reproductive choice for women”. It is her intention to facilitate the killing of children before birth by removing “unwanted” unborn children from the protection of the Crimes Act. Under her proposal they will be able to be killed with impunity under the Health Act as a “reproductive health service”.

Right to Life requests that the Prime Minister ceases discriminating against our unborn children and revokes her plan to decriminalise the killing of the unborn.

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

United Nations International Women’s Day – preventing violence against Women

by Leave a Comment

Media Release 8 M

Right to Life fully supports the International Women’s Day 8 March, to promote gender equality, and to oppose discrimination including violence against Women. We  commend the Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern for speaking out against violence against women. Violence against women and girls is an international problem of pandemic proportions. Violence against women is always a violation of human rights; it is always a crime and it as always unacceptable.

Right to Life asks the Prime Minister “how can you oppose violence against women and yet support the violence done in abortion against women and their precious unborn? How can you say you are opposed to violence against women and yet say that killing a woman in the womb is not a crime but a “reproductive health choice for women?”

Andrew Little on 27 October 2018 made the following comments on Newshub Nation, in response to concerns about the options put forward by the Law Commission. He said in regards to the potential lack of safeguards concerning sex-selection abortions, that women are “quite capable of making these judgements themselves. I don’t buy into this argument that we should start working through a checklist of potential things, reasons why women might seek an abortion.”

Right to Life believes that this statement by Little shows an appalling discrimination against women in the first nine months of their lives in the womb. What in effect he is saying, is that he believes gender should be a ground for abortion. We believe that the vast majority of New Zealanders would be shocked by a Miniser of Justice making such statements which may be construed as his support of sex selective abortion

The Police in New Zealand received over one hundred thousand in fact, 118,910 family violence calls to be exact, in 2017.  There were 13 women killed by their partner or ex partner in 2015. Violence against women takes many forms. It is disappointing that our community is in denial and refuses to recognise that abortion is violence against vulnerable women and their unborn child. An abortion entails an assault on the womb of a woman and a lethal assault on the life of her child.  Frequently it is because the father of the child wants the child killed because he refuses to accept responsibility for the child he has fathered, or for the care of the mother of his child. Nearly half of the children conceived yearly are female. What greater violence is there against women than to be killed in your mother’s womb?

It is thus disappointing that the government and Parliament actually continues to sanction and fund violence against women by financing the violence of abortion under the guise of health care. The government should not be surprised if New Zealand continues to be an increasingly violent society with the worst rate of family violence in the world

If we truly want to live in a society that respects women we must first protect mothers to be and their babies. The first step in achieving this is to ensure that our MP’s stand up against injustice and Jacinda Ardern’s attempts to decriminalise this awful and violent act.

Ken Orr
Spokesperson,
Right to Life New Zealand Inc.

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…]

Parliament’s Health Committee’s Report is a Road Map for a Culture of Death

by Leave a Comment

Parliament’s Health Committee, chaired by Dr Paul Hutchinson has released its report on its enquiry into “Improving Children’s Health Outcomes and Preventing Child Abuse. The introductory paragraph of the section of the report on the subject of “Pre-conception care and sexual and reproductive health” is a road map for a culture of death. The  report states,

“We recommend that the government develop a co-ordinated cross-sectoral action plan with the objective of giving New Zealand world-leading, best practice evidence- based sexuality and reproductive health education, contraception, sterilisation, termination, sexual health services, distributed to cover the whole country.”

Is this the New Zealand that we want to bequeath to our children?   I think not? Right to Life commends the Committee for a number of positive recommendations.  it is however concerned that an enquiry that was intended to prevent child abuse has recommendations that will increase child abuse. Right to Life must ask, was this section written by Family Planning? The recommendations are all in accordance with the plans that they have for our families and the phraseology was vintage Family Planning. The word ‘reproductive” appears an incredible forty -five times in this section. Reproductive is the word that Planned Parenthood and its population control allies in the United Nations and around the world claim include abortion services, which it does not. The recommendations of the Committee reflect those made by Family Planning they are:

  • In respect to abortion, that the Contraception Sterilisation and Abortion Act 1977 and the Crimes Act 1961 be reviewed.

  • That it be mandatory that all Schools teach sexuality education and reproductive health education programmes..

  • That parents  be prohibited from having their children taken out of sexuality and reproductive education classes.

  • Greater access to free contraceptives for teenagers, with the provision of long-acting reversible contraceptives.

Right to Life requests the government to uphold the right of schools to reject sexuality and reproductive health education programmes and the right of parents to take their children out of these classes.  Right to Life requests that the government provide abstinence school programmes, which promote self control and self respect. It would result in a reduction of unplanned pregnancies, STIs and abortions. The cost to the health budget is nil.

Abortion is the ultimate in child abuse. The Health Committee is recommending a review of the abortion law with the undisclosed motif of having abortion decriminalised, which is totally disingenuous. If the Health Committee were serious about reducing child abuse they would have recommended:

  • That the law recognise the status of the unborn child, the weakest and most defenceless member of the human family, as a human being endowed with human rights, the foundation right being an inalienable right to life. Predictably, but to their shame, the Family Planning Association requested  the Committee  to oppose recognising the unborn child as a human being and a person ”as this could erode women’s access to abortion.” Family Planning knows that if the unborn were recognised as human beings, then it would be uncomfortable to kill them.

  • The Committee should have called on Parliament to ensure that certifying consultants were held accountable for the lawfulness of the ninety-eight per cent of abortions authorised on the grounds of mental health. The Committee should be aware that these abortions are being authorised for socio- economic reasons masquerading as psychiatric.  

The Health Committee is failing the young people of New Zealand in believing that all our problems will be addressed by providing free contraceptives and making abortion more accessible, that is The killing of the innocent, more accessible. Abortionist and international contraception promoter Malcolm Potts [former director of Planned Parenthood of England] in 1976  quoted in ‘Sex and Social Engineering’ by Valerie Riches made the following statement. He said as people turn to contraception, there will be a rise, not a fall, in the abortion rate. The Committee’s recommendations would result in an increase in promiscuity, unplanned pregnancies, STIs and abortions. Right to Life requests the government to promote a culture of life by not  implementing the Health Committee’s recommendations in this area.

Ken Orr

Spokesperson,

Right to Life,

This is the website of Right to Life NZ Inc.