Somehow I missed this, but obviously I like it. Who wouldn’t?
Discussed the government’s requirement of an ideological purity test (I support “reproductive rights”) in order for small business and not-for-profits to receive funding for summer interns with John Oakley on AM 640 yesterday. Very pleased he took the issue on. Less pleased with my meandering replies here but the gist is this: The Charter is intended to protect conscience rights, not transgress them. And while the Liberals want to stick it to anti-abortion groups, they are in effect creating a chill for all charities who will not check that nebulous box saying they support “reproductive rights.” Many a church or NGO hired interns to help with basic stuff for low-income Canadians–things like summer camps for kids who couldn’t otherwise go, etc. Also, just as a side note, “reproductive rights” needs to be very much challenged as a term, something the media rarely does.
This article explains why Congressman Trent Franks’ resignation makes sense. I had only heard little pieces of information about this case, but this article tells more of the story:
Solicitation for surrogacy offends the dignity of the female person just as much as solicitation for sex. Indeed, solicitation for surrogacy derives from solicitation for sex and is made possible only by the pharmaceutical separation of sex and conception and the medical innovation and sale of in vitro fertilization. Gestational surrogacy provides a clinical method for transferring ejaculated sperm from Trent Franks’ body, for example, into an egg and onto the body of a female contracted, typically for money, to the implantation, gestation and hand-delivery of a living, human baby. The surrogate’s body becomes the object of a legal agreement by which the contracting parties regulate and restrict the daily behavior and the maternal rights of the female and sever the human child’s legal and actual connection to its birth mother.
Read about this, in the New York Times. I’m fascinated by this statement:
While a link had been established between birth control pills and breast cancer years ago, this study is the first to examine the risks associated with current formulations of birth control pills and devices in a large population.
They say this link has been established years ago, as if it were old news. It’s true, the link was established long ago, yet most women are unaware. Doesn’t the Pill help diminish the risk of certain cancers, too?
Risk goes up as you age, leading the researchers to advise that older women find a different method of birth control.
The study also found that the risk increased the longer women used contraceptives involving hormones, suggesting the relationship is causal, Dr. Mørch said. “It is a very clear picture for us, very convincing.”
Vindicating for those of us who spoke against the Pill for this very reason. What’s next: the New York Times reporting the Abortion-Breast Cancer (ABC) link? Likely. Give it time and this is precisely what will happen.
CBC is taking a look at abortion. Today, as I type, they are listening to men’s experience with abortion. I can’t help but think this is a good thing because the stories are definitely conflicted and you can’t avoid that, unless they were to censor almost every story.
One fellow just now, in Windsor:
There were two abortions and you wonder sometimes. Anybody who has experienced an abortion, anyone who doesn’t at least ponder what that child would have been like, I think it’s insane if you never think what that child would have been like… It’s normal. You’re gonna be curious, you are going to think about it… It’s hard to say if we regret it. Looking back now, having three, looking at that whole time frame, sometimes I think maybe it wasn’t the right choice, but ultimately you can’t change the past.”
All this to say, people “get it” on the human level. What would these children have been like? It’s normal to ask that.
As I finish typing this, I’m listening to a man talk about how he has never gotten over the abortion his girlfriend had.
I would love for women and men to be healed from their abortions. Counselling plays an important role in this. When people are healed and can talk about it, I think we’ll see a less pro-choice culture. To this end, if you are in the Ottawa area there is help for you, free of charge, at First Place Options. Also you can google Project Rachel.
Does abortion support women’s rights or detract from them? Here, I put forward some questions and reasons why access to abortion detracts from women’s rights. Please forward to your friends who are pro-choice and feel free to tell me whether any of these arguments resonate.
Those of us who are against abortion understand that abortion attempts to equalize men and women in a manner that is both impossible and undesirable.
Was reminded of this poignant song this morning.
This is where abortion decisions live–in our hearts, years after the fact, when we have other children, or when we don’t, and we wonder what the lives of our aborted children would be like. So many people carry this burden in the quiet of their hearts. They don’t go to the March for Life, they don’t play politics. But how can you not ask questions about what would have been?
Happy birthday, so make a wish
Please accept my apologies, wonder what would have been
Would you’ve been a little angel or an angel of sin?
Tom-boy running around, hanging with all the guys
Or a little tough boy with beautiful brown eyes
I payed for the murder before they determined the sex
Choosing our life over your life meant your death
And you never got a chance to even open your eyes
Sometimes I wonder as a fetus if you fought for your life
Would you have been a little genius in love with math?
Would you have played in your school clothes and made me mad?
Would you have been a little rapper like your poppa The Piper?
Would you have made me quit smokin’ by finding one of my lighters?
I wonder about your skin tone and shape of your nose?
And the way you would have laughed and talked fast or slow?
Think about it every year, so I picked up a pen
Happy birthday, love you whoever you would’ve been
Don’t be the one to make this mistake. Cecile Richards, President of Planned Parenthood of America, recently betrayed that she thinks natural family planning is “the rhythm method.” It’s not. And it looks really foolish when you publicly make this mistake, especially in her position. I take comfort in seeing that about a thousand people called her out on Twitter. Natural family planning is taking off for many different reasons and in many different ways, not least of which is that it’s empowering for women to learn about and have access to these methods.
Draconian new law, supported by the Opposition. This stands as the moment in which I fully decided that it’s over my cold, dead body that I would vote for Ontario’s “Conservatives,” in spite of how bad the current government is for my home province of Ontario. We are all (pro-life or pro-choice) a little less free now.
Indeed, the act makes illegal any “act of disapproval concerning issues related to abortion services, by any means, including oral, written or graphic means” within 50 metres of a clinic (or other permitted distances, not exceeding 150 metres). As written, having a conversation a few blocks away from an abortion clinic that the state deems insufficiently enthusiastic about abortion could make you liable to prosecution.
I saw Mona Charen speak once and was impressed. I know I’m all Weinsteined out at this point, but I think her article, which makes a call for the Me Too hashtag to be replaced with Be Decent, is worth showcasing. Particularly this paragraph:
For decades feminists have made abortion the signature feminist issue — thus signaling that consequence-free sex for men (who don’t undergo the surgery and heartbreak) was a key goal. Feminists may not have intended to thereby send the message that they were all in on the sexual free-for-all, but some men concluded as much nonetheless. Feminists set themselves a contradictory task — to insist that men and women were indistinguishable in their sexual tastes and appetites but then to demand that men respect women’s particular reserve.
I don’t think women really truly believe in consequence free sex–there is too much at stake. But oddly, we are told, by other women, no less, that this is plausible.
I’ll never forget the fellow I was dating back in first year university, who tried very hard to convince me to get on the Pill. It would be good for my cycles, he said. Ha! He didn’t believe in consequence-free sex, either.
Nonetheless, the message of abortion available on demand is that sex can be consequence free. The problems with this idea are self-evident. It’s women who bear the brunt of that particular lie when we have to take a pill every day that changes our hormones (contraception), or undergo surgery (abortion) to make it be so.