ProWomanProLife

You are here: Home / Archives for 2008

Archives for 2008

“The uneasy conscience of feminism”

by 3 Comments

I did not want to comment on this Camille Paglia piece until I read it in full. I’m glad I did. On top of being splendid prose, this piece is a boon to the pro-life movement. 

Let’s get straight to the part that has raised the ire of pro-lifers. Paglia says abortion is murder and then adds she fully accepts abortion. Is this shocking? Perhaps. But every woman who has had an abortion is grappling with that very sentiment. This is the essence of the debate and why pro-lifers care at all in the first place. Never to curtail anyone’s choices–but rather to identify that a person is a person, even in the womb (was tempted to say no matter how small, with apologies to Dr. Seuss) and therefore elimination is not a choice. Paglia has put on the page what every strident pro-abortion activist accepts and knows. They simply don’t say it.

Paglia speaks of “the uneasy conscience of feminism…” and I know that well. It’s that silence that descends most every time the “A word” comes up. I like to think it’s the sound of people’s conscience contorting, writhing around what they know to be true and what they’ve been told they must say. Most women will never accept that murder is their special privilege.

Abortion is “the extermination of the powerless by the powerful,” again, Paglia’s words, which I will be sure to repeat. (If you don’t think abortion is the extermination of the powerless by the powerful, you’ve not watched one in progress, and you should.) Pro-abortion types fare better in the public square if they conceal, conceal, conceal. This is why Bill C-484 had to go. Because it would have started women and men thinking, thinking, slowing realizing–what are we doing? And that is the frightening consistency of pro-abortion types: keep abortion out of the public mind, because free thought is out of bounds.

I’ll take Paglia’s words one step further: the extermination of the powerless by the powerful begins with conniving and devious so-called supporters of women’s rights–those who lie about what abortion is and then convince everyone that access to abortion is a right–hey! this isn’t evil! It’s empowering! They know what Paglia knows–and cloak the act in comfy euphemisms. They meet women in their personal deserts and offer a refreshing drink of cyanide. Only they call it Sprite and add ice and one of those fun paper umbrellas.

Though Paglia’s conclusion is repugnant to me, she is not coercing anyone to her view. She hardly could–it’s not a very good slogan–“Murdering millions–in particular those who have done absolutely nothing wrong and can’t defend themselves! Join today!”  

She says:

It is nonsensical and counterproductive for Democrats to imagine that pro-life values can be defeated by maliciously destroying their proponents. And it is equally foolish to expect that feminism must for all time be inextricably wed to the pro-choice agenda. There is plenty of room in modern thought for a pro-life feminism — one in fact that would have far more appeal to third-world cultures where motherhood is still honored and where the Western model of the hard-driving, self-absorbed career woman is less admired.

Bottom line: this kind of disquieting article does the pro-life movement a great service. 

_______________________

Véronique adds: I doubt that Camille Paglia is a closet pro-lifer. Or that she would be delighted by our endorsement. That being said, I want to say how much I liked reading her article. She takes a strong position and she defends it to its logical end without rhetoric or slogans. This is someone I feel like I could have an intelligent conversation with. On the pro-choice side. That in itself gives me hope. Not so much that I could convince her because I don’t think I could. But it gives me hope that we can engage in these issues instead of avoiding them.

Didn’t take long

by 3 Comments

Stéphane Dion warns against a Conservative hidden agenda. They never get tired of that line, do they.

__________________________

Tanya adds: Dion said, “So I want to ask him: how far is [Harper] more right-wing than Canadians?”

Like, all Canadians?  The short answer to that question is that he’s more right-wing than some and less right-wing than others.  (I never went to politics school ‘n stuff, but I think that’s why, like, democracy exists…no?)

 

My take on this is that Dion isn’t very liked.  But if he can get Liberals to hate Harper enough, they’ll come out in droves to vote.

More evidence that sex and pregnancy are indeed related

by 2 Comments

This study from the Guttmacher, says:  

Half of respondents had experienced at least one unintended pregnancy. Respondents described three categories of pleasure related to pregnancy ambivalence: active eroticization of risk, in which pregnancy fantasies heightened the charge of the sexual encounter; passive romanticization of pregnancy, in which people neither actively sought nor prevented conception; and an escapist pleasure in imagining that a pregnancy would sweep one away from hardship. All three categories were associated with misuse or nonuse of coitus-dependent methods.

Now I have not read the Guttmacher study in full. But my translation on the “scientificese” above is this: Pregnancy is linked–strongly–to sex and sometimes women get pregnant the result of having sex. Furthermore, oftentimes unintended pregnancies are not unintended at all.

You know, I don’t like the idea that everything we do, including pregnancy, ought to be fully and completely planned. All it nurtures is a sense of failure if you can’t get pregnant the very moment you so desire, and a sense of failure if you get pregnant when you did not so desire. (If life is aaaaaalllll about planning, I might add that I’m way off track as per the official Andrea Mrozek 1995 high school graduation power point. See graph four, slide 15 for more information…)

Cardinal Turcotte sends back his medal

by 3 Comments

To protest the Morgentaler award.

Turcotte explained his decision in a written statement released Thursday.

“I had accepted this honour on behalf of all those who, because of their faith in Jesus Christ, work in the social domain to serve the most disadvantaged of our society,” he wrote.

“I must admit that I had hoped that, in light of the large number of protests, the Consultative Council for the Order of Canada would revise its decision.

“Because it has not done so up to now and because silence on my part might be misinterpreted, I feel obliged in conscience to reaffirm my convictions regarding the respect for human life, from conception to death.

“We are not the masters of human life; it rests in the hands of God,” he said.

___________________________

Andrea adds: My first thought was something along the lines of “What took you so long?” But note he was hopeful that Morgentaler’s Order would be revoked, justice restored, and he could keep his. Well, good on the Cardinal, I say. Still hoping for others to do the same.

___________________________

Tanya says: There’s the expression, “Better late than never.” Then there’s the saying, “If you are hoping for change, be the change.” I still stand by the opinion that Cardinal Turcotte should have been among the first to send his medal back.

That hidden agenda

by 2 Comments

To this list, I’d add defunding of procedures not medically necessary, like abortion. My opponents argue abortion is so very private–then let it be truly so and stop using my money to fund it.

Perfect for timid politicians, incidentally; they don’t have to make any comment on abortion itself, simply have to withdraw the money. Perfect for libertarians, in particular those who don’t care about abortion–it reduces state expenditures. Most of all, perfect for women’s groups who support abortion as a woman’s private, personal choice. A win-win!

Banning positive mentors, peace and love

by 3 Comments

This, from yesterday’s Globe:  

But others fear Ms. Palin’s emergence as a parental role model sends a different message. As a vocal opponent of abortion, Ms. Palin’s widely discussed decision to keep her baby, knowing he would be born with the condition, may inadvertently influence other women who may lack the necessary emotional and financial support to do the same, according to André Lalonde, executive vice-president of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada. Dr. Lalonde said that above all else, women must be free to choose, and that popular messages to the contrary could have detrimental effects on women and their families. “The worry is that this will have an implication for abortion issues in Canada,” he said.

Dr. Lalonde said he aims to ban hope next. “After all, those going through tough times hardly need to be reminded that others are doing AOK, have pulled through,” he said. “Seeing that something better exists could totally eradicate their choice to be unhappy, miserable, even. And that choice is important.”

_____________________________

Tanya adds: It’s a tough task, bashing Palin and sounding intelligent at the same time. She supports the war AND has a child going off to fight it. She opposes abortion AND made the choice to carry to term a pregnancy that 95% of women would have terminated.

It’s so much easier to pick someone apart when they’re full of hot air – is the lesson here.

_____________________________

Patricia adds: Perhaps Dr. Lalonde would feel more comfortable about the status of “choice” in Canada if I kept my youngest daughter (who has Down Syndrome) in a closet. After all, sometimes when I go out with her, I might let it slip that I actually like having her around, am proud of her and, heaven forbid, love her and am glad that she was born, imperfect as she, and I, are.

Just think how that would threaten “choice”. Imagine what would happen if Canada was filled with people like us, just wandering around looking happy or maybe even normal, putting pressure on women who just want to be unhappy and miserable about their imperfect babies so as to feel like they have no option but to abort them, for everyone’s good.

Funny, I thought the job of an obstretrician was to provide care for pregnant women so they could have healthy babies, and wouldn’t die giving birth. Instead, according to Dr. Lalonde, it’s to protect “choice”, above all else. And apparently, women’s abilities to make choices are so fragile that they need to be protected from the real experience of other women. The fact that I and countless other parents who actually have children with Down Syndrome aren’t miserable all the time, that we actually think it’s a good thing to have children with Down Syndrome in the world, that we don’t see ourselves as victims of some horrible cosmic injustice who are justified in exterminating our own imperfect children, that is a threat to “choice”.

Much better for women to rely on the blinkered advice of “doctors”, most of whom have absolutely no experience of parenting a special needs child and many of whom seem far more concerned about the professional horrors of delivering a less than perfect baby. (Ask my doctor about the grilling she and I both got when she allowed my “defective” youngest to slip through the cracks of modern prenatal care.)

A woman can feel really good about having this Society watching out for her better interests, can’t she?

Meta