Royal Newfoundland Constabulary Duped by Religious Leaders into Violating the Rule of Impartiality

UPDATE: Please see update at end of posting.

Or this might also be appropriately entitled: "Dialogue between the RNC and a St. John’s Religious Leader"

Last Wednesday, September 5, 2007, something shameful went down in Newfoundland history in the city of St. John’s, and shockingly, but very sadly, it took place at a meeting of the province’s top religious leaders.

Furthermore, officers of the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary (RNC) not only permitted it to happen but they also facilitated the outrageous incident where a loyal son of Newfoundland was stripped of his fundamental rights of free assembly and free speech.

In addition, as a result of the RNC’s cooperation and complicity in the affair, at the end of the day this man’s character was impugned and on provincial, if not national, television news he was filmed and falsely portrayed as an unruly protestor, some extremist who had disrupted the Press Conference of a wonderful new coalition of religious leaders.

To date, no correction, retraction or apology has yet been issued by any of the parties involved in this egregious violation of the person of Eric Alcock.

The following scenario is one that might have been constructed by any Newfoundlander who expected the RNC, of all parties, to be able to assist and defend in a situation where fundamental rights and privileges of his/her person were being threatened, and where unjust discrimination and accusation had been laid.

1. Religious Leader (RL): Officer, we called you here to have this man removed.

2. RNC: Very well sir, what has this man done?

3. RL: Well, he has come here to disrupt this meeting and he is not welcome.

4. RNC: He looks peaceful enough to me.

(turning to guest) Is this true sir? Have you come here to disrupt?

5. GUEST: No Officer I have not.

6. RNC: (to guest) What are your intentions in being here sir?

7. GUEST: I came here Officer hoping to express a viewpoint should the opportunity present itself. I have no intention of disrupting this meeting.

8. RNC: (to RL) Sir, this man says he has no intention of disrupting this meeting. Has he actually done anything disruptive?

9. RL: Well, no, but he just got here a minute ago. I’ve been welcoming him (and holding him) by shaking his hand, until my associate just headed into the hall to immediately fetch you two officers.

10. RNC: So he hasn’t done anything disruptive to this point?

11. RL: No, but we just don’t want him here in case he does.

12. RNC: But Sir, you must realize, this is a public press conference and all interested parties have been invited.

13. GUEST interrupts: Yes, Officer, and the reason I learned about the Conference was I received a forwarded email from Coalition members to all those interested in the issue of poverty and encouraging them to be in attendance.

14. RL: Well, we insist Officer that he must leave immediately or that you remove him because he is a threat to our meeting.

15. RNC: Sir, has this man threatened you or others in any manner?

16. RL: No.

17. RNC: Has he made any threatening gestures?

18. RL: No.

19. RNC: Do you suspect that he has a weapon of some sort that he intends to use here?

20. RL: No Sir but he did say some very mean, bad things about us yesterday in a press release.

21. RNC: I’m sorry Sir, there’s no law against expressing a viewpoint. I ask you again, what has this man done to warrant his removal?

22. RL: Very well then, we would just like to disinvite him, to rescind his invitation. We don’t like him.

23. RNC: I’m afraid Sir there hardly seems sufficient cause to remove a law abiding citizen from a public event to which he appears to have been invited just because you don’t like him. Furthermore there is no evidence whatever of disturbance or threats.

24. RL: We just don’t want this man expressing his opinion and bringing chaos to our meeting.

25. RNC: Sir, as I said before, there’s no law against expressing viewpoint. I’m sure others present here today are likely to be doing the same. And besides, please explain how your meeting will be thrown into chaos simply by allowing this man to express his opinion. Will others present start throwing chairs around?

26. RL: Of course not! But it will detract from our good initiative and usurp our very pleasant message to Newfoundlanders.

27. RNC: Perhaps Sir, if you wanted to ensure that everyone present was going to say only good things about your initiative, you should have sent out private invitations and given passwords for the door.

28. RL: But I protest Officer! I had you people called in and waiting so that you could immediately remove this man once we had identified him.

29. RNC: Sir, you are beginning to sound very extreme. We understood there might be some threat posed by this man’s presence at this event. It appears that is not the case and I urge you to remember that this man has certain rights and freedoms which we must also respect and protect. We will monitor this man’s activities throughout this conference and act accordingly. In the meanwhile, please release this man’s hand.

Imaginary? Yes. Sadly so, and perhaps too much to ask for in the times in which we live.

When the same thing happens to YOU and you recall that you were one of the people who failed to speak out regarding this incident, you’ll be feeling a whole lot worse sitting in the paddy wagon than even Mr. Alcock did.

Now remove #’s 4 through 29 and replace it with the following and you have a summary of how the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary failed miserably in its duties to ensure justice on the most fundamental level at the Press Conference called by the Religious Social Action Coalition on Wednesday, September 5, 2007 at 11AM in St. John’s NL at The Lantern.

4. RNC: Sir, you are no longer welcome here. If you do not immediately leave, we will forcibly remove you.

And indeed, they did just that.

UPDATE: It has been brought to my attention that the real violation here was not being discourteously thrown off private property, as rude and hypocritical as that was, but detention without accusation.

Apparently my detention for one hour in a police cage on site, without reading of my rights or being accused of an offense, was the real violation.

Hannity's Planned Parenthood Segment Now On YouTube

Planned Parenthood will stop at nothing to keep the killing machine going.

H/T Jill Stanek

CanadianChristianity.com Covers Amnesty Meltdown: Interviews Vote Life, Canada!

“One death is a tragedy; a million is a statistic.” Joseph Stalin

On Tuesday of this past week, CanadianChristianity.com called on Vote Life, Canada! for comment regarding the recent decision by Amnesty International to add abortion advocacy to its agenda. In particular, CanadianChristianity.com was interested to know why Vote Life, Canada! raised such a loud voice in protest and also why our comments focused so strongly on the failure of Canada’s Catholic Bishops to do more to derail Amnesty’s insidious plans.

The story is now published on the CanadianChristianity.com website and it’s a fairly substantial piece on the controversy, particularly when combined with CC.com's former story in May 2006 when the news first broke on the AI proposal.

I commend CC.com for raising the profile on this tragic turn of events within the AI organization. Certainly there has been relatively little comment from Canadian Christian media overall in regard to the news. Not surprisingly, I note in the CC.com story the shocking, ongoing apathy among representatives of Canada’s Christians.

The spokesman for the Catholic Bishops notes that the Bishops “haven't changed their minds either on abortion or the AI situation,” which presumably means they still think a comment on a website was/is sufficient. Bishop Henry was the only bright light among the Bishops, denouncing AI’s plans in his 2006 pastoral letter and, according to CC.com, withdrawing his support for AI.

The Evangelical Fellowship of Canada (EFC), the voice of Canada’s evangelicals, maintains “the EFC is strongly pro-life but has no plans to comment on the policies of a secular agency,” leading one to ask whether the EFC comments only on those plans to murder unborn children that are announced by “non-secular,” i.e. Christian organizations.

Obviously the Christians of Canada have more pressing matters on their plates. Perhaps they have been anesthetized by 40 years of legalized child-killing in Canada. Perhaps they have, if only sub-consciously, come to accept the legality of the barbaric practice. So much for the supremacy of God's law in the life of the Canadian Christian. So much for Isaiah 58:6.

But consider Amnesty International: this extremely influential and global organization which is expertly trained and experienced in advocacy, with membership of 1.5 million, an annual operating budget of $30M, and with projects in over 100 countries. Consider that this organization mounted a campaign on behalf of Soviet prisoners of conscience that was so influential that President Gorbachev invited Amnesty representatives to Moscow to discuss the reforms that were much needed in the Soviet Union.

Now consider that almost overnight this same group has shifted energy and resources into securing for every woman in every nation of the world an unrestricted access to reproductive “freedom.”

An evil twin—perhaps worse, a big brother—of International Planned Parenthood and UNFPA has suddenly hatched and the reaction of Canada's Christian leaders? Yawn.

Some say AI's new goals are outstanding and laudable. Yet most certainly the exercise of such widespread “rights” and “freedoms” will demand the deaths of countless more unborn children, likely to number in the millions. Already at least 46 million Unborns perish annually through the violent act of abortion worldwide and one of AI’s newly stated goals is now to work for decriminalization of abortion in the other 97 countries where it is currently illegal.

But judging from the response from Christians in Canada, you’d never say there were human lives involved here. You’d never say that countless little innocent unborn children created in the image of God and representing the future of mankind were going to be ripped to death or cut into pieces because of this new proposal by AI.

What possible justification can the Bishops of Canada offer for the existence of a national body if at a bare minimum they can not or will not offer a vigorous and effective, nation-wide campaign to defend innocent unborn lives? What possible justification can EFC similarly offer? Both national bodies say they are “strongly pro-life.”

Allow me to ask a question of the Christians and their leaders in Canada. If the threat posed was not one by an international group to campaign for the slaughter of innocents but rather by Revenue Canada to remove the charitable tax status of churches in Canada, would that be sufficient to energize and mobilize the leaders? Would such a threat be worthy of outrage, condemnation and yes, even national campaigns?

Yet the withdrawal of tax status would not represent a direct threat to the life of even one person.

But a threat which jeopardizes the lives of millions of silent and invisible Unborns is apparently no big deal, hardly worthy of a comment.

Some Christians might wish to make a distinction here, protesting that there’s wisdom in not taking on a fight which appears unwinnable.

Does that mean then that the Christian is not to raise his voice and speak the truth, or take steps to defend his brother, or even live out his daily Christian life unless there is good reason to believe he will be successful? Thank God the early Christians persevered “by faith” in the face of extreme adversity and even in the face of lions and sure death. Thank God that Jesus did not first weigh up the odds of success at Calvary. Thank God for all those in Hebrews 11, of whom the world was not worthy, who died for their faith, “not having seen the promises.”

Unborn children perishing in the womb, of whom Canada is not worthy, will at least share in their martyrdom.

Inasmuch as you have done it unto one of the least of these my brothers, you have done it unto me. Matthew 25:40

[image source]

Michael Vick, Killing Babies and Dog Fighting

Vote Life, Canada! noted the following opinion piece by US based “Stand True Ministries” issued today through Christian Newswire.

**********

Stand True Ministries President, Bryan Kemper, released the following commentary about the hypocrisy of PETA, The Federal Government and the NFL regarding the Michael Vick Scandal. "I am disgusted that we as a nation are so outraged over dog fighting while thousands of babies are being mutilated daily" said Kemper.

While the title of this commentary is meant to be sarcastic, it is sadly true. Michael could have invested his money into an abortion clinic and he would not be in trouble, in fact he would be protected. It may be against federal law to inflict cruelty on animals but it is perfectly fine according to the law to dismember little baby boys and girls any time in the first nine months of their lives.

I am horrified by dog fighting just like most people; I think it is a barbaric practice and should be illegal. I am not however, okay with the fact that our federal government allows more protection to a dog than a human person. It is absolutely asinine that we as a society can get in an uproar about dog fighting and still allow the destruction of almost 4,000 precious children each day.

Organizations like PETA are in their own words, "bellowing for strong action on behalf of dogs". They want the NFL to make rules about its players and their involvement in dog fighting and animal cruelty. I wonder if PETA would support the NFL if they made rules against its players being involved in paying so called "doctors" to kill their own children.

John Rolfe, a writer for Sports Illustrated wrote, "Only a drooling, spiral-eyed sadist would insist that drowning, hanging or electrocuting innocent dogs should be an un-punishable offense, let alone allowing them to rip each other to shreds for fun and profit". I wonder if he would include injecting saline into a baby while still in the womb, or suctioning their body parts off with a hose into that category.

Where are we heading as a nation if we cannot protect the most innocent and vulnerable citizens, the pre- born children, yet we can offer such protection to dogs? Since when are dogs more human than babies? God have mercy on our nation, we are so blind.

PETA is asking the public to help demand that the NFL add cruelty to animals to its personal conduct rules. I want to ask the public to ask PETA to demand the same protection for babies in the womb. I challenge PETA to show some consistency in their crusade against cruelty and work for the same protection for humans as it does for animals.

Call PETA at 757-622-PETA (7382) and ask them why they won't stand up for the babies with the same passion they stand up for the dogs.

[source]

**********

What sane Christian could disagree with Brian Kemper’s expose of this hypocrisy? Here in Canada the same kind of apathy and hypocrisy results in the deaths of nearly 300 Canadian Unborns daily.

But PETA deserves only a very small part of the blame here folks. Consider that PETA is hardly the only outraged party. It is the public at large that seems unusually enraged.

And keep in mind that in this unfolding event PETA is rightfully engaged in its mission. The charges of execution of dogs by hanging, electrocution or other brutal means, if true, are shocking and barbaric and call for judgment and penalty. Remember that PETA does not advocate for the Unborn, nor do they advocate for the elimination of racial discrimination. Quite simply, those are not their goals.

So I think highlighting the actions and hypocrisy of PETA and particularly making calls for PETA to demand rights for the Unborn is misplaced. Such an approach detracts in a crucial way from the truly effective action demanded from Christians living in a culture marked by legalized child killing.

The Michael Vick scandal is a rare opportunity of sorts for Christians to not only expose the hypocrisy of the public, as Bryan Kemper and many other Christians have done, but more especially to expose the hypocrisy of fellow Christians in their silence on the horror of child killing. Christian leaders especially need to be hit hard with the fact that their abysmal failure to confront the prevailing “culture” with the truth is the very thing that sustains skewed, hypocritical public attitudes regarding the health, welfare and treatment of animals in relation to treatment of unborn humans. Always this confrontation must begin first in their own pulpits, not in the streets and on the airwaves in public protest [although that is certainly a possibility for step 2].

This is the pro-lifer’s finest strategy: to keep Christian leaders [starting with their own!] accountable for dispensing the truth about the slaughter of the Unborn, about the humanity of the Unborn and about the means of winning justice for the Unborn. Crucial to the success of Christian leaders to accomplish this is the watchful eye and vocal stance of the [pro-life] Christian whose determined, prayerful follow-up ensures the proportionate attention to match the injustice.

It can be nothing less than the declaration and exercise of an all out Campaign of Accountability amongst the Christians of Canada.

Can God expect anything less from the true Christian? Will anything less than that work?

More background and commentary on the Michael Vick fuss can be found here:

Report: Michael Vick Accepts Plea Deal

Of Dogs and Babies by Chuck Colson

Some readers’ comments from CNN

PETA blogs on the “inhumanity”

More Debate Ignited Over Reproductive “Choice”

Yes, indeed, the debate in Canada over legalized child-killing has been “sparked” by the Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform—just as that organization fully expected and planned for. [Warning: There are graphic pictures of abortion on that website]

I’ve shared with readers all the significant news reports, radio interviews, readers’ comments and blog postings which I’ve seen on the subject. Yesterday, I reported on the NAF’s blog posting by Vicki Saporta, Executive Director of one of North America’s largest baby-killing advocate organizations, quoting Calgary Bishop Henry to support her position. If there are other reactions of note that readers know of, please pass them along so that they can be shared on the Vote Life, Canada! blog.

I highlighted previously the interesting post by the Johnonlife blogspot about the CCBR’s use of graphics. Yesterday, another very insightful posting was made on that blog. Go check it out. You won’t be disappointed.

Another blogger, Ted Mathis, gives his take.

Other interesting feedback from readers of the National Post appears below.

Is anti-abortion message too much?

Re: Activists Drive Home Anti-Abortion Message, Kevin Libin, Aug. 11.

The message of the Canadian Centre for Bioethical Reform's Stephanie Gray is not of social justice but of agree with me or be bullied. It is a message of lies, half truths, provocation, disrespect for women and children. She portrays abortion as a single moral issue, not the complex social issue of raising standards of housing, nutrition, childcare, health, education and therefore indulging in a richer Canadian society.
H. Hamilton, Markham, Ont.

In Canada today it takes real backbone to come down publicly on the side of decency and morality. Prenatal infanticide is a dreadful holocaust that must be vigorously opposed. So the pro-choice crowd calls the posters "misleading." What's misleading about the truth? Power to the posters, and whatever else it takes.
Bill Shaw, Medicine Hat, Alta.

The creative approach of the Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform in informing the public of the real consequences of abortion is to be admired. Many people who say they are pro-choice have never thought about what abortion actually entails; seeing photographs of the consequences to the child should change a lot of hearts and minds.

To say that the pictures are upsetting, yet fully approve of the procedure which produces such images, is like burying one's head in the sand. Much better for women to know the consequences both to themselves and their babies, before making a choice which ends the life of another human being.
Jessica White, West Vancouver.

Even those of us somewhere in the middle on the abortion issue do a double-take when an abortion supporter such as letter-writer H. Hamilton accuses anti-abortion activists of "disrespect for women and children." Is abortion not the greatest disrespect one can show a child? No longer are we encouraged to sacrifice for a child but to sacrifice the child itself.
A. Koresaar, Toronto.

40-Day Vigil Launched to Stop 'Abortion Fortress'

A news release from Pro-Life Action League on the deceptive tactics of the largest organization of child-killers in the world, Planned Parenthood.

If abortion is something to be celebrated, why all the effort to keep a new facility secret?

**********

40-Day Vigil Launched to Stop 'Abortion Fortress'

Contact: Eric Scheidler, Pro-Life Action League, 773-251-8792

AURORA, Illinois, August 15 /Christian Newswire/ -- "Next month, Planned Parenthood intends to open one of the largest abortuaries on the face of the earth," said Pro-Life Action League Communications Director Eric Scheidler. "We're praying that never happens."

Scheidler is leading a massive prayer campaign to stop the opening of a new, 22,000 square foot Planned Parenthood facility at 3051 E. New York Street in Aurora, Illinois, in the western suburbs of Chicago. On August 9, Scheidler launched a 40-day around-the-clock vigil that will run through September 18, the scheduled opening date of the center.

"Planned Parenthood snuck into our town -- neither the city of Aurora nor many of the contractors working on the building knew what it really was," noted Scheidler, an Aurora resident. "Now they're going to try to sneak into our schools, drive a wedge between parents and children, and begin killing unborn babies here. Not without a fight."

The new building was constructed under the name "Gemini Medical Office Building." The League was tipped off to the site's real purpose by a contractor familiar with the construction. Calls and e-mails to the city government by dozens of pro-lifers caught the interest of the press, and the true identity of "Gemini" was revealed: it is none other than Planned Parenthood.

Aurora pro-lifers were dismayed at the prospect of an abortuary opening on the east side of their town. Only ten months ago, the west side abortuary of notorious abortionist Aleksander Jakubowski finally closed once and for all.

But local activists by the hundreds are rallying to fight the massive new center, which has been dubbed the "Abortion Fortress" because of its high brick walls, bulletproof glass and numerous security cameras.

Scheidler acknowledged that it will be hard to stop the facility from opening. "Planned Parenthood knew what they were doing. Pro-lifers have stymied them before when they knew Planned Parenthood was coming to town. This time they kept things quiet until it was too late to halt construction."

Nevertheless, Scheidler is optimistic. "This is the most powerful grassroots pro-life effort I've ever seen," he commented. Churches of all denominations from throughout the Chicago area are taking part in the 40-Day Vigil, which is already bringing forth miracles of conversion in the community. "We can scarcely keep track of the prayer pledges coming in," he said.

The pro-lifers have set up a website for the campaign, FamiliesAgainstPlannedParenthood.org, where concerned citizens can learn about the danger of Planned Parenthood, get resources, and even sign up for the Vigil.

A community meeting is planned at the Prisco Center, 150 W. Illinois in Aurora on Thursday, August 16 at 7 p.m. which will feature veteran Planned Parenthood foe Jim Sedlak, Pro-Life Action League National Director Joe Scheidler, and pro-life attorney Denise Mackura. A massive protest is planned at the Planned Parenthood site August 25 from 9-11 a.m.

Scheidler concluded, "The people of Aurora and their neighbors in nearby towns do not want an abortion clinic here. Period."

Interview With Stephanie Gray By CKNW 980’s “Nightline BC” Was A Bust

It just had so little punch to it.

Stephanie was strong and on target with all her commentary, so that part was effective, but the interviewer failed to really facilitate a good discussion with points raised, rebuffed, etc. I don’t think he really knew enough about the issue to do any better.

But I do think he did the best he could under the circumstances.

And then of course they had problems with the phone line [apparently] and so no callers were actually able to get through to offer their comments.

And then of course Vicki Saporta, Executive Director of the National Abortion Federation, was not featured in the same interview, as expected. Instead, the host Michael Smyth introduced Dawn Fowler, Canadian director of the NAF. She put up a really weak and hopeless front when questioned, insisting that the pictures were one-sided and misleading because abortion is a “complex issue.” And she asks, “How can a photograph be a good representation of a complex issue?”

Perhaps the interviewer should have asked how a picture of a starving Third World child can give so much information for a “complex issue” and result in such keen interest and support, but as I said, the interviewer was just in over his head.

Ms. Fowler tried hard in other ways to direct attention away from the actual act of abortion. She claimed the CCBR’s website was untruthful because the claim was made there that there is a link between abortion and breast cancer. Her most outrageous comments though were centred on her incredulity regarding how such graphic pictures were obtained, as though it was all some kind of hoax because pictures like that are far removed from the actual results of abortion!!! After all, she noted, in as close to a quote as I can produce, most abortions take place when the fetus is only a mass of cells.

Truly blind, deceptive and utterly pitiful!

But let’s face it: Poor-choicers have no case except a manufactured one.

The interview was at least a start. CCBR has accomplished their initial goal…to reignite the debate in Canada over the legalized killing of unborn children.

News Alert: CCBR's Stephanie Gray To Be Interviewed Tonight Along With NAF's Vicki Saporta

Stephanie Gray, Executive Director of the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform (CCBR), based in Calgary, AB, reports that she will be interviewed this evening on the CKNW 980 Radio program, “Nightline BC” hosted by Michael Smyth. Vicki Saporta, President and CEO of the National Abortion Federation, will also be featured in the same interview.

This interview has been a direct consequence of CCBR’s recent launch of their Reproductive ‘Choice’ Campaign, taking graphic images of aborted fetuses to the streets of Calgary on the side panels of large trucks. Through a number of featured blog postings, Vote Life, Canada! has maintained high profile coverage of this groundbreaking strategy to save Canada’s Unborn.

The National Abortion Federation, a high profile pro-abortion activist organization, sister to Planned Parenthood, is responsible in large degree for the continued attacks on unborn life in Canada and the US. In response to the CCBR’s action in taking graphic images of abortion to the streets of Calgary, the NAF issued a press release condemning CCBR’s tactics and accusing them of using “misleading” images.

Tonight’s interview/debate will be a rare opportunity to hear the status quo on child killing in Canada challenged on the airwaves of Canada. Stephanie Gray is a most able apologist for the Unborn, and a fearsome adversary in any discussion/debate about the rights and personhood of the Unborn.

As one university pro-life student noted,

“Stephanie Gray is director of the Canadian Centre for Bioethical Reform, and we've had her several times to do lectures, debates, and Pro-Life 101. We had her this semester to debate against Elizabeth Cavendish of NARAL, and she pretty much destroyed Miss Cavendish, and I say that with the utmost charity and honesty. She is an excellent debater; she's about 28 years old, speaks strongly and has the arguments down pat. Her lectures are similar to Scott Klusendorf's in the organization of arguments, and the main content.”

The “Nightline BC” program [http://www.cknw.com/shows/show_nightlineBC.cfm] starts this evening at 7pm Pacific Time. [10:00 Eastern, 11:30 Newfoundland. Everyone else can figure from there.] Phone calls will be taken from 7:05 to 7:30pm PST. Follow the link on the website to listen live to the program.

Pro-lifers can consider making a call to encourage Stephanie and the work of CCBR by telephoning 604-280-9898 or 1-877-399-9898.

Vote Life, Canada! urges all those interested in the defense of Canada’s Unborn to tune in to this valuable broadcast.

More Media Reaction To CCBR Graphic Mobile Billboards Of Aborted Fetuses

Two newspaper stories about CCBR's "street message" appeared yesterday in the newspapers of Canada:

The Calgary Herald, in a report by Nigel Hannaford entitled A Message to Remember,

The van and its images are the work of the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform, a militant pro-life group. Executive director Stephanie Gray says it will be around for the indefinite future. So there it is. If you drive in Calgary, you are going to see this, one of these days.

And, in my view, a good thing, too.

However, reasonable people could certainly disagree about the display of pictures, as a catalyst for social change.

Those unswervingly committed to abortion on demand, will of course find the truck irredeemably objectionable.

But then, pro-lifers feel the same about poisoning babies in the womb with saline solution, then cutting them up with surgical tools. Displaying the bloody results is for them, a challenge to the other side to justify what they do.

The National Post reports fairly on the event in a piece entitled Activists drive home anti-abortion message

If the display does provoke a reaction, well, that's the point. Three-metre-high posters cover the truck's cargo box, with photos of bloody fetuses, accompanied by the simple phrase, in huge letters: "Choice."

Ms. Gray makes no apologies for her confrontational methods, likening them to those of early social reform movements such as abolitionism, ending child labour in the U.S. and the civil rights campaign. She is fond of quoting Martin Luther King, Jr. and argues that it was only when people were exposed to photographic evidence of "injustices" that they were moved to demand change.

….snip

Celia Posyniak, executive director of Calgary's Kensington Clinic, an abortion provider, has heard from several people outraged over the truck.

"I just think in Canadian society, it's really a rude, crude display. It shows a lack of manners," Ms. Posyniak says. Such "scare tactics," she insists, don't work, since women seeking an abortion have "very compelling reasons" for doing so and will only be upset, not influenced, by the billboards.

….snip

In the U.S., where the Center for Bio-Ethical Reform operates 10 trucks and several bannered planes, opponents and municipalities have tried censoring the graphic signs. The CCBR expects the controversy will intensify here once the school year begins, as parents are forced to explain the bloody pictures on the passing truck to distressed kids in the back seat. The CCBR may even make a point of driving past junior and high schools. "Where people are old enough to have abortions, they're old enough see abortions," Ms. Gray explains.

Both articles note the objections of Calgary’s Bishop Frederick Henry. As Vote Life, Canada! noted on previous occasions, with friends like this, the Unborn need no enemies. Like Nehemiah who rallied the people behind God’s cause, faced down the naysayers with the truth of God’s promise, and was quick to say, “…the God of heaven will make us prosper,” pro-lifers determined to show the entire truth of child-killing in Canada will win out in the end.

Imagine Celia Posyniak of Calgary's Kensington Clinic—the most unredeemable place in Calgary—accusing the CCBR of rudeness and crudeness. She claims it’s "a lack of manners" and "scare tactics." Imagine the brazenness from the director of a facility that violently kills over 2900 unborn children annually. How might one characterize Posyniak’s manners?

When interviewed last year by Calgary Herald columnist Naomi Lakritz, and asked whether patients are counselled on fetal development,

Posyniak at first appeared not to understand the question. "Women aren't stupid. They know what stage of pregnancy they're in," she said. When pressed, she said, "If they ask, we'll show them, but it's not forced on them. Why should they see fetal development?"

No doubt Posyniak laments that now they, as well as all Calgarians, must also see the graphic results of their “choice” when they daily drive the streets of their city.