Trudeau Government forced to settle with pro-life groups over denial of grant funding

By Jonathon Van Maren

As most of you will already know, the Trudeau government recently announced that any organization or business that wishes to apply to the Canada Summer Jobs Program must first prove their eligibility by submitting an “attestation” that affirms their organization’s support of abortion, transgenderism, and a laundry list of other progressive causes. Justin Trudeau’s idea of diversity is limited to those who actually agree with him on nearly every issue, and his government is now setting an extremely dangerous precedent by insisting that Canadians meet certain ideological criteria before becoming eligible for a previously neutral government program.

It seems that the Liberals have not learned their lesson. When they denied pro-life groups Canada Summer Jobs grants earlier this year, three groups—the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform, Guelph Right to Life, and Toronto Right to Life–commenced lawsuits against the Ministry of Employment, claiming the denials were a breach of their Charter 2(b) right to freedom of expression. Last month the Ministry settled with the three organizations by awarding funds each group should have received while admitting the groups, “were denied funding on the basis of a criteria neither set out in the Applicant’s Guide nor included in the MP’s list of local priorities for 2017.”

In other words, when Trudeau’s Liberals were informed, via a publicity campaign by the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada, that pro-life non-profits were also accessing this government program, they hastily intervened in the process and imposed an ideological purity test on applicants for the first time. As the result of these actions, they were forced to pay out three pro-life groups for the amount they had applied for in the province of Ontario. It must have been extraordinarily painful for the government to mail those cheques. Carol Crosson, the legal counsel for the three pro-life organizations, says that further legal action against the government to combat this new ideological purity test is probable.

The Conservative Party is already stepping up to oppose the Liberal move as well, with Andrew Scheer’s spokesman Jake Enright telling LifeSiteNews that, “Canadians should be very concerned that the government of Canada is basing its funding decisions on whether or not you hold a certain belief. We’re also concerned that individuals who hold private convictions may, for example, no longer be able to help care for the disabled or refugees or provide day camps for children in need.”

This is precisely the case—under the criteria laid out by Trudeau’s Liberals, organizations from the Salvation Army to Samaritan’s Purse could be rendered ineligible for this program. As I mentioned in a previous column, the very religious convictions that drive so many Canadians to reach out and help their less fortunate neighbors are the same convictions that will render them ineligible in the eyes of Justin Trudeau and the Liberal Party of Canada.

This new decision will be opposed. The Trudeau Government has already been forced to settle with pro-life organizations once. The millions of Canadians excluded by Trudeau’s new criteria can meet this challenge again.

FacebooktwitterFacebooktwitter

30 thoughts on “Trudeau Government forced to settle with pro-life groups over denial of grant funding

  1. John Zylstra says:

    In this case, court costs also ought to be considered, especially if it is the second time this irrelevant ideological criteria is being misapplied. It would be like denying funding to an organization just because its board members happened to belong to the LIberal party, or wanted to travel to South Carolina for vacation. If the government keeps doing this and forcing defendants to go to court, they are bullying and imposing unnecessary delays and court costs, even if the plaintiffs win the case. And for that they should be held accountable.

  2. Jane and Brian Wright says:

    Trudeau’s enforced ideologies are reminiscent of Nazi Germany before the war – they enforced restrictions and discriminatory rules against less than perfect Germans and the German Jewish people before they started eliminating them…they also changed the Christian church to a fake Nazi Christian church…they gradually softened people up for distain, intolerance and hatred of those targeted by Hitler…much like Trudeau is doing to Christians and people of faith in our country. More and more religious values are denigrated and targeted in our country. Christians have traditionally been helpers in society – started our hospitals, been sources of charity helping the underprivileged long before any governments helped their citizens, etc etc. This government is sewing hated and division in our country. The next group that needs a public apology is traditional Christians.

  3. George says:

    Well the Lord said in his word that in the last days men would call evil good and good evil so be not afraid his people but rejoice for your redemption is at hand and to evil doers repent while you still can Jesus saves all repentant sinners who wash themselves in his blood

  4. mike sweet says:

    this is another blatent attempt by this liberal govt to try and steal our rights and freedoms in this country its time trudeau was held criminally responsible for his blatent discrimination who is he to tell canadians what they must think what they must do and steal our rights to free speech and expressions and he should be charged for child abuse for every student his govt is brainwashing with his lgbtq teachings in our schools he does not own our children nor should any govt or religion brainswash our children in schools any that do must be immediately fired and their pensions revolked and until this liberal lunacy is out of our schools canadians should refuse to send our children as we so not need them taught liberal lunacy

    • Francois says:

      “Transgenderism” (whatever you mean by that) is not a “progressive cause”…it’s a legit diagnosis. And the use of that term is disrespectful to boot. What educated person would even bother reading past the first sentence once you have clearly displayed such ignorance?

      • Jonathon Van Maren says:

        Well, clearly you did, sir. And conclusions can be reached accordingly, I’m sure. Gender dysphoria is the diagnosis, just for your future reference.

    • Francois says:

      Given your writing skills, it certainly looks like your parents thought similarly regarding the school attendance recommendation.

    • Jacqueline Amable says:

      Did you voice that opinion when the Harper govt gave funding to ONLY “Christian” groups and no one else? Not defending what Trudeau tried to do, correct an imbalance that went on in the previous admins however the fact is, “Christians” did not worry about other’s rights when they were the only one who benefited under Harper .. so I am asking why is it different?

  5. Tim Bratcher says:

    I agree it was wrong for Trudeau’s administration to try to impose an ideological purity test.
    However, I do not believe funding of the Canada Summer Jobs Program to be a legitimate, biblical use of tax revenue. Christian organizations ought not apply for it.

  6. Dorothy King says:

    The government does not understand the Charter at all. It is a guaranteed protection for ALL Canadian citizens and organizations and using a litmus test against religious organizations means that the government is failing its fiduciary responsibilities of equality to ALL Canadians. The criteria for the Summer Jobs Program is to give training to all post-secondary students during the summer so they can continue in their education with some earned funding under their belts. Why are we starting to use litmus testing in our government programs? Does that mean that as a Christian, I will be denied Canada Pension Plan retirement benefits just because I am a Christian? If this mess is not dealt with now, we will be dealing with it down the road in the Supreme Court of Canada. Do we know how much legal fees it takes to do that? A lot. We must push back against our present government and hold them accountable for their actions. They are responsible to the whole of Canada who are voters and not just their messy and nasty personal views.

    • Francois says:

      Nobody ever said that the rules applied to a particular religious group. However, the Charter ensures that religious beliefs do not infringe upon the rights that the Charter protects. If it weren’t for responsible governments imposing restrictions, there would still be witches being burned at the stake for heresy. The biggest contribution religion has made to humanity is war. I hope we can finally be rid of it completely one day so we can stop fighting over it. I support anything that prevents its proliferation.

      • Jonathon Van Maren says:

        That is a misunderstanding of the Charter, although a common one. Actually, the Charter was created to protect people and their beliefs from the government, not vice versa. It was to act as a shield and not, as it is in this case, a sword. Your comments on religion are simply uneducated and sadly simplistic. I advise you to do a bit of reading on history and some studying before repeating the bumper stickers of the New Atheist movement.

        • Sam says:

          You’re right – the Charter protects the people from the government and the Human Rights Legislation protects people from each other on certain grounds and in certain areas.

          Interestingly enough, government support of religion actually harms religion. Let’s take a more outlandish test for an example.

          Let’s say the program required belief in Vishnu in order to qualify for funding. This blatantly states that the government supports the Hindu faith, to the exclusion of all other faiths. This acts as a “shield” for those of the Hindu faith and “sword” for anyone of any other faith and is not Charter compliant

          Truthfully, the “sword”/”shield” analogy often breaks down at law. It is much easier to state that the government cannot interfere with anyone’s religious beliefs and also cannot support any religious belief. The government must take a neutral stance on issues of religious belief and allow all faiths to co-exist, so long as they don’t physically harm each other (ie. witch burning).

          Now, is abortion a religious issue? Not really. It is impacted by the religious beliefs (ie. when life begins), but is is not a matter of any scripture I am aware of (outside the OT pregnancy test for adulterous women, which I’m fairly certain led to a supernatural abortion, although I could be corrected on that). As a result, it is a public health issue and would not be infringing any person’s religious freedoms to legislate about it or require organizations receiving public funding to not stand in the way of the public health efforts.

          From the perspective of the government, why fund a group that is fighting against publicly funded public health efforts?

  7. Ron Dunn says:

    If you notice the main ones complaining about this are the churches, the ones who don’t pay any type of taxes at all. But want tax payer money to finance their beliefs.

  8. Jim says:

    If Trudeau thinks he can get away with this, what will he try next. I’ll too you where his masters want it to lead and that’s to make anyone who wants to work period sign this type of declaration. Thank God we have a democracy where dictators like him cannot complete they’re agenda. The system that was put in place is to protect the people from such tyranny and God will deliver his people from this oppression.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *