The right to life from conception to natural death is the foundation of all Catholic social teaching.
This is something that is not subject to alleged forms or ‘modernizations.’ It is not
‘progressive’ to try to resolve problems by eliminating a human life.
Catholics care about the sanctity of life because the entire purpose of each soul God endows with life is to find its way back to God by loving God and caring for all the souls God has placed around it. Voluntary termination of life any time between conception and natural death necessarily frustrates that purpose.
The source of human dignity is the likeness to God that is bestowed on each of us at the moment we are conceived. We respond appropriately to this gift by using all the time, talent, and treasure that God has entrusted to us to seek and grow closer to God, by sharing in His continuing act of creation and caring for those around us. Our first purpose is to seek God, especially in one another. If we do that, everything else will be given to us. Anything that interferes with that is contrary to the Word of God. Genesis chapter 1; Matthew chapters 6, 22 & 25
Abortion & Euthanasia
“You shall not kill.”
– the 5th Commandment
The right to life from conception to natural death is the foundation of all Catholic Social Teaching, and in particular, implies the illicitness of every form of procured abortion and of euthanasia. – 155, Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church
“This is not something subject to alleged reforms or ‘modernizations.’ It is not ‘progressive’ to try to resolve problems by eliminating a human life.”
– Pope Francis, Evangelii Gaudium 214
Human Engineering
Cloning and Cell Manipulation
An issue of particular social and cultural significance today, because of its many and serious moral implications… the simple replication of normal cells or of a portion of DNA presents no particular ethical problem. Very different, however, is cloning understood in the proper sense. Such cloning is contrary to the dignity of human procreation because it takes place in total absence of an act of personal love between spouses, being agamic and asexual reproduction. In the second place, this type of reproduction represents a form of total domination over the reproduced individual on the part of the one reproducing it…
Cloning for therapeutic use does not attenuate its moral gravity, because in order that such cells may be removed the embryo must first be created and then destroyed. Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, 236
Gender Election|
Everyone, man and woman, should acknowledge and accept his sexual identity. Physical, moral and spiritual difference and complementarities are oriented towards the goods of marriage and the flourishing of family life. Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, 224
Men and women with homosexual tendencies must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. Catechism of the Catholic Church, 358
Population Growth; Birth Control; Family Planning
Judgment concerning the interval of time between births, and that regarding the number of children, belongs to the spouses alone. This is one of their inalienable rights, to be exercised before God… The intervention of public authorities must be made in a way that fully respects the freedom of the couple. All programmes of economic assistance aimed at financing campaigns of sterilization and contraception are to be orally condemned as affronts to the dignity of the person and the family.
The answer to questions connected with population growth must instead by sought in simultaneous respect both of sexual morals and of social ethics, promoting greater justice and authentic solidarity so that dignity is given to life in all circumstances.
All reproductive techniques — such as the donation of sperm or ova, surrogate motherhood, heterologous artificial fertilization — that make use of the uterus of another woman or of gametes of persons other than the married couple, injuring the right of the child to be born of one father and one mother who are father and mother are ethically unacceptable both from a biological and from a legal point of view. Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, 234-235,
Human Trafficking
The solemn proclamation of human rights is contradicted by a painful reality of violations, including new forms of slavery such as trafficking in human beings, illegal drug trafficking, prostitution. “Even in countries with democratic forms of government, these rights are not always fully respected”. Some serious problems remain unsolved: trafficking in children, the phenomenon of “street children, and the use of children for commerce in pornographic material. 158, 245 Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, 158, 245
Abortion, Euthanasia & Alternatives
Abortion
The party states that:
– while currently, abortions are performed by BC health care professionals both within provincially-operated facilities and private clinics, it believes that abortions (the killing of tiny human beings) do not qualify as “health care”, nor that BC taxpayers, many of whom are conscientiously opposed to abortion, should be forced to pay for them
– it also believes that the money spent on abortions in BC could be better spent on pregnancy care and support for new mothers. Many studies indicate negative health impacts for women who undergo abortions, including suicide, depression, birthing complications and a higher incidence of breast cancers.
– therefor the party advocates a. removing abortion from the list of taxpayer-funded surgical procedures
– the party further believes that BC taxpayers should not be forced to pay for any surgeries that are not medically necessary. (Abortion is an elective surgery and is not medically necessary).
– it advocates restoring the access to statistical information about abortions performed in all BC hospitals and private clinics, including making it mandatory to document all medical procedures in BC. This information must be available to the public through Freedom of Information requests.
– repealing provincial “Bubble Zone” legislation (Access to Abortion Services ACT of 1995) and restoring freedom of speech in BC.
Socially-Assisted Death
The party advocates defending senior citizens and those with disabilities from attempts to institute euthanasia and assisted suicide in the province of BC.
Human Engineering
The party states that:
– BC taxpayers should not be forced to pay for any surgeries that are not medically necessary.
Abortion, Euthanasia & Alternatives | Human Engineering | Population Control
The party has published no statement concerning its policies relating to:
• The meaning or purpose of life
• Abortion, euthanasia, or alternatives
• Gender modification, gene manipulation, or other forms of human engineering
• Population Control
Abortion, Euthanasia & Alternatives | Human Engineering | Population Control
The party has published no statement concerning its policies relating to
• The meaning or purpose of life
• Abortion, euthanasia, or alternatives
• Gender modification, gene manipulation, or other forms of human engineering
• Population Control
Abortion, Euthanasia & Alternatives | Human Engineering | Population Control
The party has published no statement concerning its policies relating to:
• The meaning or purpose of life
• Abortion, euthanasia, or alternatives
• Gender modification, gene manipulation, or other forms of human engineering
• Population Control
Abortion, Euthanasia & Alternatives
The party has published no statement concerning its policies relating to:
• The meaning or purpose of life
• Abortion, euthanasia, or alternatives
Human Engineering, Population Control
The party states that:
– since it came into office, reducing costs for British Columbians remains a priority for it. It has been steadily increasing investments over the past several years to help people with everyday costs, including making more services free, such as prescription contraception.
In-Vitro Fertilization
The party states that:
– for people wanting to start a family, infertility and other barriers to parenthood can have a profound effect on their well-being and quality of life.
– to support people who need help on the path to parenthood, its 2024 budget allocates $68 million for the establishment of a program to help with the cost of in-vitro fertilization (IVF) services, including consultations with an expert clinical group to define funded IVF services including age considerations, service delivery options, and care pathways to access the service throughout B.C. The program will be launched April 1, 2025, to help with the costs of treatment and medication for a single cycle of treatment.
– the new publicly funded program will benefit hopeful parents in B.C. regardless of their relationship status, who they love and how much money they make by removing a barrier for people who may not otherwise be able to access fertility services.
(FOR REFERENCE ONLY – PARTY HAS ANNOUNCED ITS WITHDRAWAL FROM THE ELECTION. CHECK CANDIDATE LISTING AND CONSIDER ALTERNATIVES BEFORE GOING TO POLLS)
Abortion, Euthanasia & Alternatives | Human Engineering | Population Control
The party has published no statement concerning its policies relating to:
• The meaning or purpose of life
• Abortion, euthanasia, or alternatives
• Gender modification, gene manipulation, or other forms of human engineering
• Population Control
Points to Ponder: Life & Human Dignity
A conscience well formed by the social teachings of the Church will take seriously the following questions:
The Dignity of Life and Social Indexes to Guide Policy-Making
It is a sad fact that many of our parties, along with many of our voters, have stopped talking about or even acknowledging the evils of abortion, Socially-Assisted Death (SAD), and other sins against the dignity of life. Is this because we as a society have been distracted by the comforts and worries of modern life, and lost touch with the purpose of life? Or are we hiding, like the timid steward of Matthew 25:18?
And what of our governments? For years, many (probably most) of our political parties have been fond of asserting, in dozens of ways, that various groups of Canadians “deserve” or are “entitled to” a very wide variety of benefits in order to enable them (us) to live lives of “dignity.” They are much more reluctant, however, to offer any indication of what they mean by a “dignified” life, or any way of measuring the effect of the benefits they propose on improving it. Indeed, the only indexes used by most governments to gauge wellness of any kind are gross domestic production levels (GDP) – the aggregate worth of the material objects our society produces. This has caused many observers to remark that Canada and other parts of the world appear to have lost any common conception of the proper meaning of the dignity or purpose of life, replacing that common conception its accompanying sense of community, shared culture, and a sense of the common good with an obsessive consumerism and pursuit of comfort and material wealth. All sense of civil community and our obligation to serve that common good suffers as well. The result has been a postmodern individualism that leaves human beings feeling isolated and on their own.
In his encyclical Fratelli tutti, Pope Francis observed that:
Today, in many countries, hyperbole, extremism and polarization have become political tools. Employing a strategy of ridicule, suspicion and relentless criticism, in a variety of ways one denies the right of others to exist or to have an opinion. Their share of the truth and their values are rejected and, as a result, the life of society is impoverished and subjected to the hubris of the powerful. Political life no longer has to do with healthy debates about long-term plans to improve people’s lives and to advance the common good, but only with slick marketing techniques primarily aimed at discrediting others. In this craven exchange of charges and counter-charges, debate degenerates into a permanent state of disagreement and confrontation.
Recently some parties have begun to propose various “wellness” indicators as an alternative to reliance on GDP in gauging social wellbeing. Such indicators are based on factors said to represent the health, happiness, and well-being of society and its individual members. And in 2019 the current Canadian government quietly introduced a new “Quality of Life” measure in its instructions to new cabinet ministers, and caused the creation of a “Quality of Life Hub”. The Hub introduces the index and a draft method for measuring it, and solicits public feedback. (See https://www160.statcan.gc.ca/index-eng.htm)
1) Bearing in mind that it is citizen voters who are ultimately responsible for the behaviour of democdratic governments, how should Catholics respond to the government’s call for comment, with properly and prayerfully-formed consciences?
2) What does the government say about abortion, suicide, “gender modification,” population growth, and other life issues?
How do the following questions, and their answers, factor into the government’s proposed framework? How do they relate to life and politics in the province of British Columbia?
- What limits should be placed on voluntary termination of human life, either prior to birth or at any time before death? What can or should be done at the federal level, and what should be left to the provinces, or to private, religious, or other non-profit organizations?
- What options is our society able to offer to reluctant or unwilling mothers, as alternatives to abortion and to support unwanted children?
- Is it appropriate to allow minors to consider suicide as a health care option without consulting their parents?
- What options can be offered by provincial or federal governments to families of minors who are being encouraged to consider medically-assisted suicide?
- Are federal restrictions and controls on cloning and the use of human cells, fetuses, and body parts properly crafted? What, if anything, should be done differently? Should there be more discussion of this serious moral issue in our society?
- To what extent should voluntary, elective services that are morally questionable to large numbers of individuals, such as the voluntary termination of life or the voluntary “modification” of gender, be financed publicly through mandatory taxation? If such services are to be offered, should they be financed by the individuals who elect to access them, or by sympathetic charities, or by dissenting taxpayers?