ProWomanProLife

You are here: Home / Archives for 2008

Archives for 2008

I won’t look, I won’t discuss–I approve!

by Leave a Comment

Abortion is best approved of in the dark, not in the light of day, where full and open debate might turn the public against it.

This article discusses Democrats versus Republicans–Barack Obama and Catholics–on abortion. Abortion is not like war, or capital punishment, says the author. He also highlights Obama’s position:

In the particular case of Barack Obama, their case is an even greater mess. Bill Clinton, the last Democratic president, frustrated the will of the U.S. Congress by refusing to sign legislation outlawing partial-birth abortion. Even though this procedure means — just before a full delivery — puncturing the head of the infant so that the brains may be suctioned out, Obama, as an assemblyman in Illinois, took the same position here as the Clintons did: in favor of this grim procedure. Worse still, Obama strongly spoke out in opposition to legislation to disallow abortionists from putting to death infants who survived a first attempt at abortion.  

How do you soften that position–make it more palatable? You can’t.

Declining rate of Kodak moments

by Leave a Comment

In case no one has noticed, I haven’t been blogging as much lately. The photo biz is partly to blame for it all.

I capture milestones people want to remember. That’s my self-imposed day-job (besides raising my daughter full-time, that is). I get called on mainly to shoot engagements, weddings, pregnancies, babies, children, and families.

Analyzing stats like these ones here makes me realize: people know what their best memories are – their moments worth capturing in time – yet we insist on having less and less of them.

Funny how that works.

Wow, really?

by Leave a Comment

‘Supermom’ increasingly considered unrealistic:

LONDON — The enthusiasm for juggling high-powered careers and motherhood is on the slide in Britain and the United States as support for stay-at-home moms appears to be growing, a major study showed yesterday.

The study, by Jacqueline Scott from the University of Cambridge, suggests that growing numbers of people are concerned about the impact of working moms on family life.

[…]

“It is conceivable that opinions are shifting as the shine of the ‘supermom’ syndrome wears off, and the idea of women juggling high-powered careers while also baking cookies and reading bedtime stories is increasingly seen to be unrealizable by ordinary mortals,” Prof. Scott said.

It’s not like saying one should not, or could not, work outside the home and raise a family. But you can’t do both full-time, at least not for very long, and trying to do so anyway has a cost. The key is to have goals and ambitions that are reasonable and achievable, and that’s something each family has to figure out for themselves.

When winning means losing

by 1 Comment

We are really awfully close to Newspeak around here, where government agencies claim you won even when you have, in fact, lost something. Talk about doubleplusungood.

Ezra Levant:

Some 900 days after I became the only person in the Western world charged with the “offence” of republishing the Danish cartoons of Muhammad, the government has finally acquitted me of illegal “discrimination.” Taxpayers are out more than $500,000 for an investigation that involved fifteen bureaucrats at the Alberta Human Rights Commission. The legal cost to me and the now-defunct Western Standard magazine is $100,000.

[…]

And if I had been a defendant in a civil court, the judge would now order the losing parties to pay my legal bills. Instead, the Edmonton Council of Muslim Communities won’t have to pay me a dime. Neither will Syed Soharwardy, the Calgary imam who abandoned his identical complaint against me this spring.

Both managed to hijack a secular government agency to prosecute their radical Islamic fatwa against me — the first blasphemy case in Canada in over 80 years. Their complaints were dismissed, but it is inaccurate to say that they lost: They got the government to rough me up for nearly three years, at no cost to them. The process I was put through was a punishment in itself — and a warning to any other journalists who would defy radical Islam.

[…]

Of course I’m glad to be done with this malicious prosecution — though my antagonists can still appeal my acquittal.
But two years ago, the HRC told me if I paid a few thousand dollars to my accusers and gave them a page in our magazine, I’d be set free. Most victims of the HRCs accept deals like that, and it’s certainly cheaper than a 900-day fight. But getting the approval of the HRC’s censor is morally no better than their shake-down attempt. Whether I have to pay off a radical imam or appease a meddling bureaucrat, it’s still an infringement on our Canadian liberties.

Some causes get such an easy ride, sigh

by Leave a Comment

Not my cause, and not my chosen form of protest. In what has to be a Case of Gravely Mistaken Priorities, an American swimmer appears not to know that Chinese people are imprisoned, abused, voiceless in Communist China. But no mind: 

American swimmer Amanda Beard staged the first athlete protest of the Beijing Olympics, unveiling a nude photo of herself Wednesday outside the Athlete’s Village to back an anti-animal cruelty cause. “I’m not trying to be in everybody’s face and be harsh or negative. I want to be calm and yet get my voice out there. I’m doing it for all those animals who don’t have a voice.“

A voice for the voiceless: Truly inspirational.

_____________________________

Brigitte rolls her eyes all the way to her shoulder blades: Oh wow. A nude picture. How truly original…

The choices we don’t hear about

by Leave a Comment

This is what I’m talking about: exercising your choices in favour of doing the right thing.

 

Women, empowered to choose life, in spite of obstacles, in spite of inconvenience, in spite of it all. In spite of knowing that your baby won’t make it, after carrying him for nine months. Is there not something heroic and honourable there? This is the substance of the choice that Somerville refers to in this article. And that’s the very same substance that ardent pro-abortion types won’t discuss, preferring instead to focus on how very different women’s “personal, individual realities” are.

 

I prefer to focus on what I can see, and what is true. Like the fact that disabled or not, this baby is still kicking in the womb.   

Just a fetish

by Leave a Comment

It’s not the first procedure of its kind, but it still makes the news. ABC News called it surgery on the “tiniest, most fragile of patients; those still in the womb.”

Doctors, using new technology to work inside the mother’s uterus, separate the blood vessels that connect the twins.

[The mother], sedated but awake, underwent surgery during her 22nd week of pregnancy.

During the surgery, doctors entered the amniotic sack using a kind of miniature “telescope.” Occasionally, to their surprise, a fetus will actually grab on to the scope in the middle of the procedure.

It’s the most simplistic reasoning there is to being against abortion. When it’s wanted, the life in the womb is treated by pediatric surgeons at a children’s hospital. When it’s ‘unwanted’, well, you know.

Pro-abortion advocates, though, have a name for recognizing what’s actually in the womb: fetus fetish.

The legislature of South Dakota is insincere and is acting out a fetus fetish to make themselves feel morally superior rather than focusing their scarce resources on child care for working mothers, education, and medical care for children.

(I don’t know about South Dakota, but Quebec has the highest rate of abortion in North America. Yet, we are home to daycares-a-plenty, an impressive array of educational options for women, and three of the country’s eleven children’s hospitals.)

When I think about all the lives snuffed out before they make it out of the womb, I don’t feel morally superior. I might feel a bit like I’m screaming at the top of my lungs in the middle of a crowded room while no one pays any mind to me, but I don’t equate that so much with superiority. In fact, if any one of you is looking for a glamour job – one where others recognize you primarily for your unsurpassed moral standards – skip the pro-life section of the classifieds.

Meta