Senator St. Germain's Senate statement on Rona Ambrose' Freedom of expression

Senator St. Germain just made the following statement in the Senate on October 2, 2012:

Honourable Senators,

Freedom of expression is a right often taken for granted.

As Parliamentarians, we enjoy the use of this right – free from hindrance – every day throughout the discourse of our debates and though other channels of communication.

as representatives of the public, We are responsible to uphold this right, and protect its value.

Last week in the other place this coveted right was under siege after being exercised by the Honourable Rona Ambrose during a free vote.

The issue of Ms. Ambrose’s vote in favour of Motion 312 goes beyond the subject matter of the Motion its self.

The outcry from the folks condemning her democratic action only highlights the ugly truth in this country that freedom of expression does not exist in the face of intolerance.

The opinions expressed by these special interest groups toward the actions of Ms. Ambrose are rather disingenuous.

They fail to realize that tolerance is a two way street.

During my nearly 30 years as a Parliamentarian, never once did I regret my decision to exercise my right to stand up for what I believed in.

And I defended my decisions against dissenting opinions, as was my right to do so - - - as much as it was their right to disagree with me.

But never once was I condemned or cast as morally void for having excised my right to vote freely.

Honourable Senators, whether we agree or disagree with the issue at hand, Ms. Ambrose should be congratulated - not condemned - for having the courage of her convictions to stand up and freely vote her conscience.

As a Member of Parliament, her actions rightly represent the essence of our democratic society.

Thank you.

For more on this story click here
http://weneedalaw.ca/index.php/press-kit/archive/view/listid-2-media/mailid-60-senatordefendsministerambrose

Run With Life: Are abortion guidelines enough?

Run With Life: Are abortion guidelines enough?: The Insufficiency of Guidelines Written by Mike Schouten Canada should do away with its drunk driving laws. We no longer need laws prohi...

My letter to my MP asking him to support motion 312

This is the letter I wrote to Mauril Belanger asking him to support motion 312 and I ask you to consider contacting your member of Parliament to do the same. As you can see from the article below, some MP's are looking for guidance from their constituents on how to vote. You can find your MP at this link http://www.whenamihuman.com/mp.html 

June 6, 2012

Mauril Belanger, MP

Riding of Ottawa, Vanier, Ontario

Dear Mr. Belanger,

I noticed from the article below that Barrie MP Patrick Brown is looking for guidance on how he should vote on a motion to study when life begins. I assume that all MP’s are doing the same so as one of your constituents Mr. Belanger, I ask you to please support motion 312.

Thank you,

Maureen T. Ward,

MPs to debate when life begins

BARRIE - Barrie MP Patrick Brown is looking for guidance on how he should vote on a motion to study when life begins.
“I feel anytime votes on social issues come up, it’s important to seek out input of the community. I want to make sure my vote is reflective of the wishes of the city,” said Brown, who adds the vote could occur as soon as June 13.
Motion 312 calls for a study on the evidence of when a fetus becomes a human being.
“Currently, there is no regulation at all in Canada, so (Kitchener Centre MP) Stephen Woodworth has said it should be studied.”
Woodworth filed a motion Feb. 6 to ask Parliament to form a special committee to study the question.
“Canada’s 400-year-old definition of human being says children are not human beings until the moment of complete birth. I’ve concluded that modern medical science will inform us that children are in reality human beings at some point before the moment of complete birth,” he said. “Canadians need to know there’s no human rights for children before complete birth.”
Woodworth said he doesn’t want to reopen the abortion debate, but that Canada needs a just law.
“A respectful dialogue to update a 400-year-old definition of human being with the aid of 21st century information will benefit everyone,” he said.
In 1988, the Supreme Court of Canada struck down Canada’s abortion law, as it violated Section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms by interfering with a woman’s freedom and personal security.
Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada (ARCC) is opposing the motion, as it reopens the abortion debate.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper has said he won’t support the motion, because of that perception.
“The motion is a vehicle for religious groups and the anti-choice movement to establish legal personhood for fetuses. If they succeed, they’ll try to re-criminalize abortion,” said ARCC’s executive director Joyce Arthur.
Brown added he is encouraging constituents to send letters and emails.
“People can send me petitions or letters. I’m surprised there has been very little input on this when other MPs have told me they have had a lot.”
Brown met with the Barrie Christian Council – a group of local ministers – Friday.