The Campaign Life Coalition’s Exodus 2009 (I googled Exodus 2009 and hit stories of Sri Lankan civilians displaced in civil war) March for Life held it’s yearly Parliament Hill rally.
Just about every year they complain the group claims it doesn’t get either any/enough/favorable/inaccurate media coverage.
As mentioned Michael Coren wrote a piece for them in The National Post, which was picked up by a Catholic blog in the US.
As also mentioned, The Globe and Mail gave the Campaign Life Coalition march some coverage, as did:
The Ottawa Citizen Thousands hit Hill to protest against abortion.
Lifesite News covers the Campaign for Life march every year and their crowd estimates are usually what are passed on.
Salt and Light Television is busy with coverage of the Pope’s Middle East visit, but made it to Ottawa and blogged they’ll have more later.
The Eye of the Engima is written by a Catholic high school student who, like many Catholic high school kids, get bused in for a field day.
Dies Irae, another Catholic blogger, attended. And there is more below the fold…
Catholic Archbishop Terrence Prendergast also blogged about his day, he’s a bit more chatty since he is responsible for his fellow Archbishops who fly in and for hospitality to various Knights of Columbus leaders.
Special masses are held in Ottawa cathedrals prior to the crowd hitting Ottawa streets.
Interdenominational prayer services were hosted in Ottawa by the Canadian Reformed Church and St. George, a schismatic Anglican Church (ANiC).
Antonia Zervisia blogged at The Toronto Star, giving background.
Big Blue Wave (Suzanne Fortin, a former Christian Heritage Party candidate) posted some pictures.
Religious Right Alert got mentioned at Equipping Christians for the Public Square. Tim Bloedow, former administrative assistant for the Pro-Life Caucus and former Christian Heritage Party candidate took exception to this post: Finding the Pro-Life Caucus on Parliament Hill , where the question is raised about what Members of Parliament are part of the caucus, saying it was a McCarthyite article.
Given we are discussing Canadian MPs, a Canadian name might have lent the ECPC question some credibility.
MP Rod Bruinooge released the annual pr from the March media conference this year suggesting freedom of speech of anti-abortion groups was under threat, saying there was a ”disturbing trend of intolerance towards the pro-life point of view .” Examples are not given other than LifeCanada’s billboard campaign.
Unions, campuses, students and advertisers are named as opponents and the usual ”Polls consistently show that a majority of Canadians do not support Canada’s unrestricted tax-payer funded abortion regime” is again trotted out. That might be Mr. Bruinrooge’s brothers polling firm, hard to say, facts are in short supply in this pr.
SoCon or Bust headlined Mr. Bruinrooges press release: Pro-life speech being suppressed by pro-life facists.
The site administrator for Equipping Christians for the Public Square is genuinely upset Canadians want to know what elected MP’s are up to, and responded in an unfortunate tone to the idea that even pro-life Canadians might want to know which elected officials identify with this secret caucus:
(click on the screenshot on the left to read from orginal source)
Would it not be in the best interest of all Canadian voters to know what secret caucuses their MP’s are participating in?
Just out of curiousity, how many secret parliament caucuses hand out press releases once a year?
It’s the start of a long weekend in Canada, I didn’t see any other blogs mentioning the march, did a very quick check of evangelical religious sites and blogs.
As for march attendees, The Ottawa Citizen says Jim Hughes of Campaign Life Coalition estimated about 10 thousand people braved the rain, Lifesite says 12 thousand. Archbishop Prendergast wrote The Knights of Columbus managed to come out in strength this year. Ottawa City Police don’t have estimated crowd numbers online.
” . . .Just out of curiousity, how many secret parliament caucuses hand out press releases once a year? . . .”
——————
Why should there even be a secret caucus in our parliament? What type of democratic government would entertain such a thing?
Is this a by-product of the Harper government or have there been secret caucuses during Liberal governments?
Why are these people so afraid that they have to resort to sececy?
Torontonian,
This issue is being debated at Equipping Christian’s blog, No Apologies, which linked to my work here. The Pro-Life Caucus was started under Chretien, so in that sense it’s not a by product of the Harper government. (Although various ministers, including Jason Kenney, are known former members, and possibly current members, of this caucus.)
And of course other caucuses, like party caucuses, do traditionally keep their discussions secret. I dislike that too, but it’s a side issue to the current matter, which is that we don’t even know the membership.
I suspect they’re afraid that too many pro-choice Canadians would be angered by their belonging to this caucus. Actually the excuse given is that no list can be published because members might face retribution from their party leadership.
” . . .the excuse given is that no list can be published because members might face retribution from their party leadership.”
————–
That’s a very good reason that such secret caucuses should be done away with. MPs are to be fully accountable for any and all their actions.
Naturally, party policy and planning and strategy fall outside the limits of accountability but this secret caucus about a volatile issue smacks of subversiveness of a different order.
The pro-choice Canadians should be rightly angry because they don’t need any secret caucus. They are honest and straightforward on their subject. The anti-choice people are subversive and secretive–two elements we don’t need in a democracy.
Frankly, any member of that group should not be allowed to stand again in the next election.
But the Christian right has a different view of things and their influence is waning here and elsewhere–another reason for the secrecy.
Get these ardent zygote zealots off the hill.
“That’s a very good reason that such secret caucuses should be done away with. MPs are to be fully accountable for any and all their actions.”
Well, I tend to wonder whether it’s more because it would be controversial with the public than because of the leadership, since plenty of them can and do come forward without apparently suffering. And I do agree with your point:
If MPs – like government in general feel that they have to do something in secret, that’s usually an indication that they shouldn’t be doing it at all.