Father Gravel claims that LifeSiteNews’ depiction of him in the agency’s news articles as “pro-abortion” is libelous, because he says he is “pro-choice” but does not support abortion per se.
“This case represents a danger to free speech of pro-life Canadians in terms of their being able to refer to stances embracing ‘choice’ as ‘pro-abortion’ rather than the nomenclature of their opposition,” LifeSiteNews editor-in-chief John-Henry Westen told CNA Feb. 21.
Western said the suit is a “very significant attack” on religious freedom, freedom of speech, and freedom of the press.
“It is being argued that we are not media…
A troubling story, if it’s as simple as the article suggests. I realize freedom of expression in Canada isn’t quite as hardcore as in the US, but is it really the case that media have greater rights than private citizens to massage the facts to their own stories? Or is the contrast between that of media vs. other corporations?
The fact that as an MP he voted to give the Order of Canada to Dr. Henry Morgentaler who opened the first abortion clinic in Canada really says it all.
While serving as a member of parliament, Fr. Gravel supported the nomination of an abortionist who was once detained in Dachau to the Order of Canada and opposed a bill which would have acknowledged injury of a fetus during commission of a crime as a separate offense from injury to the child’s mother.
How can he be a parish priest? He supports abortion, homosexual marriage and euthanasia
If you are ‘pro’ something it means you are in support of it. To be ‘pro abortion’ means you support abortion access. He is quibbling over semantics and I pray he loses this case
Michael Voris has blasted Father Gravel on The Vortex.
And I saw some blog entry, may have been at Patheos blasting Vortex.
Though it’s not correct, we still have our free will, I know of cases where support of the most likely least lethal of what you state above has been supported by Catholics, I think there was even a pro-same-sex-marriage campaign in a state where the signs were “Another Catholic Voter” voting for or against the Marriage Amendment. Doesn’t make it correct. Also, note, I have seen examples where though one does not come out in support of same sex m-rr–g-, they certainly welcome that community still. So, sentiments are not uniform, very sad someone would support the right to an abortion, a bit of a progressive stand.
I am in the USA of course, it’s interesting, one of the long standing Blue Army/Fatima Family Apostolate promoters had that same last name and he was very deeply involved in the Fatima cause.
Pro “choice” on rape? Arson? Bank Robbery? Genocide? Nonsense.
He still has a parish? I know that he no longer has the cure of souls in the parish he was assigned to when he sought election to Parliament…