Federal funding, in any society, inevitably leads to governments making moral decisions, often at the frustration of opposing groups. Canada’s struggle between a Pro-Choice government and Pro-Life organizations aptly demonstrates the complications that arise from such funding.

The Canadian government has been accused by many of infringing on the basic rights of conscious that belong to its citizens. As summer approaches, so do the annual grants given to groups who seek to hire workers. To meet the requirements for receiving money, a document must be signed endorsing the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which includes a pact of non-discrimination against groups of various backgrounds. While this seems reasonable, there is one part that has garnered massive attention, reading, “These include reproductive rights.” This is the portion that hundreds of organizations have taken issue with.

The wording of the document has aroused great nervousness amongst several groups, who are accusing the government of forcing them to endorse a Pro-Choice stance. Global News reports that over 1,500 applications have been denied funding, a massive increase since last year’s contract, which included no such agreement and resulted in 126 rejections. Several religious and pro-life groups cite their refusal to comply with the document’s request as the reason they were not allowed funding.

An Angus Reid Institute Survey, cited by CBC News, reveals that Canadians largely oppose denying funding to such groups if such institutions do not direct the money towards Pro-Life activities. However, a majority of those polled do believe that grant money should not, under any circumstance, be used to fund such endeavors. The debate continues today and while representatives have stated that they are not looking into directly amending their decision, they are open to suggestions and feedback from the public.

William Deatherage is a Junior at The Catholic University of America, Majoring in Political Science and Theology, as well as Minoring in Economics. William likes writing and producing media on social platforms, like YouTube, as a hobby.