Church Teaching
Sanctity of 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, is human cloning… 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. 236, Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church
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. -224 Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church
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. – 358 Catechism of the Catholic Church
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 morally 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. – 234-235, Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church
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.
CentreBC
The party has published no current 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
Christian Heritage Party of BC
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 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 (SAD, or “MAiD”)
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.
Conservative Party of BC
The party’s constitution states that its founding principles include:
-individual liberty: Recognizing the inherent value of every person, upholding their fundamental rights to life, liberty and freedom of expression.
-social responsibility: Providing a strong safety net for the vulnerable while encouraging self-sufficiency.
Abortion, Euthanasia & Alternatives
The party’s 2025 Policy Declaration advocates:
-recognizing the right of healthcare providers (including long-term care and hospice service providers) to operate in accordance with their objectives, mandates, and by laws, and preventing other Acts and legislation to usurp their rights to opt out of euthanasia and MAiD activities.
-not funding any program that deliberately hastens the death of any persons with mental illness
-barring health care providers from over-riding, compelling, dissuading, provoking patients into changing decisions regarding matters of conscience
The party has published no further statement concerning its policies relating to:
• Gender modification, gene manipulation, or other forms of human engineering
• Population Control
Green Party of BC
Sanctity of Life
The party’s constitution states that its 6 core principles include:
● Social Justice: acknowledging that all humans have a fundamental right to health, wellbeing, and freedom;
● Respect for Diversity: protecting and valuing all cultures and individuals while conserving variety in the natural world;
The party has published no further current 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
New Democratic Party of BC
Abortion, Euthanasia & Alternatives
The party’s “Action Plan for You” (September 2026) states that in order to provide better care for individuals and families, it advocates hiring more doctors and nurses and completing more surgeries, including:
-defending and expanding access to reproductive health services, including expanding midwives’ scope of practice to include IUD insertion, prescribing Mifegymiso for early medical abortions, and other services.
The party’s 2026 budget 2026 provides continued funding implemented in Budget 2025 of $34 million annually to continue equitable and affordable access to in vitro fertilization (IVF). The continuation of this program will allow approximately 1,800 families annually to receive up to $19,000 towards a single standard cycle of IVF treatment at participating B.C. fertility clinics.
The party has published no current statement concerning its policies or values relating to:
•the meaning or purpose of life
•euthanasia, or alternative
OneBC
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
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 sanctity of the body and 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 simply hiding, like the timid steward of Matthew 25:18?
Abortion, euthanasia, and other sins are a significant issue in Canada: medical homicide (SAD) is the leading cause of death in Quebec. The following table for deaths in 2022 (the most recent year for which comparable data is available) was compiled from a combination of federal and provincial documents:
According to Statistics Canada, the leading cause of death for Canadians in 2022 (the latest year for which comprehensive comparative data is available) was cancer.Based on statistics provided by the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada, the federal Ministry of Health, and others, it was homicide:
Causes of Death in Canada, 2022
Abortion 97,211
Cancer 82,412
Heart Disease 57,357
COVID 19,716
Accidents 18,365
Cerebrovascular 13,915
Assisted Suicide (“MAiD”) 13,241
Lower respiratory 12,462
Diabetes 7,557
Influenza/Pneumonia 5,985
Other assault/homicide 489
- Should British Columbians and other Canadians be concerned about any of this information?
Note: Corresponding provincial data do not currently appear to be available for British Columbia. With 12 days before the provincial election, navigating to the BC provincial statistical website (https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/life-events/death/coroners-service/statistical-reports) produces the following warning (not the warning at top, next to the red arrow), and the “no data found” message that follows.

Should BC residents be concerned that such information would be held in the period immediately preceding an election?
Selecting the item “Top Causes of Death – BCCDC and Vital Statistics” on that page produces the following result, and no statistics to be found, there or anywhere else on the site:

Should British Columbians and other Canadians be concerned?
A conscience well formed by the social teachings of the Church will seriously consider the following questions. How do the answers relate to life and politics in the Province of British Columbia?
1) 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?
2) What options is our society able to offer to reluctant or unwilling mothers, as alternatives to abortion and to support unwanted children?
3) Is it appropriate to allow minors to consider suicide as a health care option without consulting their parents?
4) What options can be offered by provincial or federal governments to families of minors who are being encouraged to consider medically-assisted suicide?
5) Is it appropriate to require unwilling healthcare personnel to participate in SAD, abortion, or other actions that are contrary to Catholic belief, or to their individual well-formed consciences? Should such persons be legally protected from performing tasks that go against their conscience? If so, how and to what extent?
6) 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?
7) All national political parties have called for continued commitment to the fight against the evil of human trafficking. What more, if anything, could be done to fight this evil, at the personal, local, civic, municipal, and provincial levels to protect vulnerable people? Are you able to recognize the signs of trafficking? If activity that you felt included human trafficking came to your attention, what could or should you do about it?
8) 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?





