top of page

Update: Big Win! Does the State Have the Right to Tell Us What Is “Accurate”?

Updated: Jul 28, 2022

Original Post

Case Update: January 26, 2022

Guelph Right to Life (GRTL) has placed ads on City buses for 20 years. Recently, the City told GRTL that their ads were inaccurate because the ads promoted the idea that the unborn child should have human rights and asked the question, "What about her choice?"

The City removed GRTL's ads because it said that these ideas were inaccurate and demeaning because an unborn child is not human and it does not make choices. Guelph Right to Life filed court Applications on the City’s decisions to refuse three of their ads, as follows: 1. “Life should be the most fundamental human right” ’with a blurry picture of a healthy baby in utero; 2. "Human rights should not depend upon where you are” with a picture of a pregnant woman on one side of the frame and the same woman holding a baby on the other;” and 3. “What about her choice?” with a picture of a healthy baby in utero. At the same time, GRTL had posted two euthanasia ads, which the City did not reject. The City made its decisions solely on the basis of Advertising Standards Canada ("ASC"- a private advertising regulator) Opinions which were, primarily, as follows: 1. It is inaccurate to say that a fetus could have human rights when it is not human; 2. ASC relied on a prior opinion to say that the ad is inaccurate because women don't typically have abortions in the later stage of pregnancy; 3. It is inaccurate to describe a fetus as “her” because it is not human, and to suggest that it has the capacity of choice is misleading. It also disparages women to say that the fetus’ choice is taken away by a woman in having an abortion.

Can the state tell its citizens that it cannot question, cannot promote ideas because that very questioning is inaccurate and demeaning? It is a dangerous thing to permit the state to determine what is true and what is false. In June, we will stand against the state brandishing its power to tell Canadians what is true and what is false.

Surely a government in a functioning democracy should not decide what is and is not accurate for its citizens. This is why Charter protection for freedom of expression is so crucial, so every individual is free to share his or her opinion, whether or not the government thinks that opinion is “correct."

This case came before the Court June 15, 2021. We now await a decision.


Update: Won on this landmark case on the right

to free speech!

January 26, 2022

On January 26, 2022, Guelph Right to Life just won their court case against the City of Guelph! The City had prohibited Guelph Right to Life posting its ads supporting life because a private advertising regulator, Ad Standards Canada, told the City the ads were “inaccurate” and “demeaning.”

If you think no one is winning the fight for freedom, that is SIMPLY NOT TRUE!

The Court said that the City had made an unreasonable decision on the Charter because it did not even consider the Charter rights of the group.

What a win for free speech!

And what a lesson - principled people need to stand up for their rights or they lose them!

For more info, see this link on the case:


Please help support the fight for cases like this one by donating

to Rights and Freedoms Advocate

bottom of page