September 8, 2008 | In Law |
I was disappointed but not surprised when I read about the BC Court of Appeal’s recent decision to maintain “bubble zones” preventing pro-life protesters from coming within 50 meters of an abortion clinic.
The Court decided that the Access to Abortion Services Act, which makes it illegal to engage in sidewalk protest in the vicinity of an abortion clinic, is a “reasonable limit” on the Charter right to freedom of expression.
Despite receiving the blind support of many Canada.com commenters, this decision was not supportive of individual freedom in any way, shape, or form. Those who claim to be “pro-choice” should be the first to understand this.
Unless one is a moral relativist, it should be easy enough to understand that there is a right and a wrong choice in many of life’s decisions. Pro-life protesters are convinced that terminating the life of an unborn fetus is always wrong. A woman who has an abortion and truly believes her decision to be the right one should be mature enough to recognize this fundamental difference of opinion and ignore peaceful protesters.
But women who are “on the fence” about abortion, particularly those who have been pressured into a decision they aren’t entirely comfortable with, should be able to hear the other side of the story. They should listen carefully to the protesters, and to their own conscience, and at the very least, make a morally informed decision.
Those who support the principle of “choice” should also respect the principle of “hearing both sides.”
