ProWomanProLife

You are here: Home / Archives for 2008

Archives for 2008

Seeking help in Toronto

by Leave a Comment

An email from very good friends… They are seeking help for an abortion-minded newcomer to Canada:

When this baby is due, she will be in Toronto without her husband because of immigration policies…  She is very fearful of going through the birth alone, and so is currently planning on having an abortion.  We are seeking a Chinese-speaking person in the Toronto area who would be open to walking through the birth with her…

If you know someone, please write in and I’ll connect you with the people trying to help. Thank you.

____________________________

Update: Friends and support have been found. Thanks to those who wrote in.

Bad moment in history to be parents of teenagers

by Leave a Comment

From NRO:

1 in 4 teenaged girls has a sexually transmitted disease. On the same day that story came out, newspapers reported another study showing that 17 percent of middle-school students had used alcohol within the past year, and 6 percent had been drunk within the past month. A previous study had shown that 47 percent of eighth graders have had alcohol, 20 percent had done so in the last month, and 12 percent had consumed “five or more drinks in a row in the previous 2 weeks.”

The author goes on to point out signs of a recurrence of the tiniest smidge of sexual morality, such as the phrase “walk of shame” to describe the act of going home from an overnight date in clothing that makes the evening’s conclusion obvious.  I don’t know that I agree; the fact that the phrase is so prevalent indicates that this behaviour isn’t unusual.

Muddy waters

by Leave a Comment

Self-proclaimed feminists express worry for the rights of a pregnant woman to use illegal drugs.

One of the most dangerous consequences of Bill C-484 is…that it muddies the water regarding the potential for prosecuting pregnant women who use drugs. Pregnant women who use drugs already face tremendous stigma and marginalization; many such women fail to access medical services in fear of having their children removed from their care.

Where to begin…

Is enabling a woman to continue her drug use, especially while in a pregnant state, really doing her a favour? Are we a backwards society for enforcing the protection of children? Is this all about the fact that a man can’t get pregnant, so he can harbor a drug addiction more easily than a woman? Is this a question of equality of the sexes? And finally, are you serious?

in many U.S. States pregnant women who use drugs are criminally charged with child abuse before the child is born and are incarcerated on the basis of protecting the foetus.

Canada’s drug laws are such that we place the bulk of penalties on dealers. To compare this to U.S. laws is to ignore everything we already know about Canada’s Controlled Drugs and Substances Act.

Judges have considerable discretion in sentencing offenders under the CDSA. Sentences may take into account aggravating factors such as selling drugs to children, using or involving children under 18 years in the commission of the offence or selling drugs in or near schools or school grounds, or other public places where youth frequent.

If anything, C-484 may mean tougher sentencing for offenders who sell drugs to pregnant women. Who wouldn’t want to see that? Other than drug dealers, that is.

National day of action?

by Leave a Comment

Protests were organized across the country yesterday in opposition to Bill C-484. For a solid week, abortion advocates were spreading the word, rallying people together, calling it a national day of action.

Nearly 100 people gathered in [Edmonton] Saturday to protest a proposed law they say poses a direct threat to women’s reproductive rights in Canada…

Similar protests were held in Ottawa and Fredericton, N.B.

Radio-Can reports more than 50 people gathered in Ottawa. (Hey, that’s the same amount of redheads that showed up to pretend-protest the Wendy’s logo!)

[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FoPmd_wc7s8]

As of yet, I’ve been unable to find any news coverage on the Fredericton protest, but the Facebook Event had 70 confirmed RSVP’s.

So, what, shall we say 300 people at most participated? I didn’t realize one one-hundred-thousandth of the population constituted a ‘national’ anything.

_______________________________

Brigitte adds: I spent yesterday exploring the streets of downtown Winnipeg (and the closed shops – this is one dead town on weekends) and can report, with a reasonable degree of certainty, that approximately zero people protested C-484 – or anything else for that matter. Perhaps because it was soooo dashed cold…

_____________________________

Andrea adds: “Hey hey! Ho Ho! Wendy’s logo has got to go!” That YouTube clip is powerful, Tanya, and reminds me that discrimination is everywhere, all around me, all the time. If I would only look harder.

“How much time?”

by Leave a Comment

As all eyes are on Obama and Clinton, at least one group is turning their attention to McCain. The New York Times writes about this campaign of NARAL (National Abortion Rights Action League) which asks how much time a woman should do in jail if abortion were outlawed.

Now I’ve never met a pro-lifer who wanted to see women behind bars. So I consider this type of fear mongering a particularly evasive strategy–the one thing pro-choicers won’t do is debate what life is. The thing is the abortion debate has never been about criminalization, but rather equality for all people. Talk about a dialogue of the deaf.  

Though I suppose if legislation outlawing abortion is your main goal, you ought to be able to answer that question.

________________________

Tanya adds: This talk of imprisonment is a bit of strategy, to say the least.  I doubt NARAL mentions that Poland, Portugal, Ireland and Malta share the western world’s strictest abortion laws, and have yet to send a woman to prison for having one.

So I suppose the question of “how much time” has effectively been answered.  None.

 

Telus is in the clear…

by Leave a Comment

…but I have at least one girlfriend who is a fish rights offender. Her poor fish swims alone, day in, day out. (The Swiss are mandating stringent standards for animals. Read about it, here.)

[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tz_JqLPzWCU]

__________________________

Tanya adds: Oh, not just animal…plant life, too.

“None of this is a joke. The world’s leading science journal, Nature, recently reported that Swiss biologists are worried. Funding for their work might get cut off if they offend the dignity of plants.”

 

Oh, they’d definitely pull the plug on the ecology project I did in 8th grade!

 

BTW, abortion in Switzerland was legalized in 2002.

We’re supposed to get used to this?

by Leave a Comment

From the UK, 12 to 15-year-olds are having abortions.

Ann Furedi, chief executive of the British Pregnancy Advisory Service, which runs a chain of abortion clinics, said: “This is a tiny number of girls. Children grow up very quickly in our society. They are maturing faster physically, psychologically and socially, and society just has to come to terms with that.”

It is a small number of girls–10 to 15 each year–but we ought to be shocked, maintain that shock, increase the shock. True compassion isn’t shown by saying hey, that’s normal, get used to it! And it is entirely alarming and painful to read that someone would advocate that view. Would Furedi say that if it were her 12-year-old daughter?

This is where “women’s rights” becomes an obvious fraud. Who will start the “girl’s rights” movement–a 12-year-old is not a woman, after all.

Speechless

by Leave a Comment

Caught this while perusing The Corner. I don’t know what to say.

_________________________

Andrea adds: We’re speechless, apparently Manhattan Mini Storage is too. I just called the number on the ad, and was transferred to someone else in New Jersey. I asked (friendly, I promise) whether Mini Storage was actually working with pro-abortion forces or were they perhaps just given unfortunate placement on a billboard. She said it’s an old photograph and it’s not up in New York City today. And would say virtually nothing else–but she promised to call me back.

Now if you look at Mini Storage’s web site, you’ll note who they give money to if you contract with them for your storage needs. So pro-lifers will now know, well, not to.  

_________________________

Rebecca adds: Hey, they want to ban horse-drawn carriages. Surely if they want to stop domesticated beasts of burden from being used as beasts of burden, they would care that much more about unborn, you know, humans, right?

Right?

_________________________

Andrea again: One would think, Rebecca, but one would be wrong. No, I think this business is pandering to the Disenfranchaised Feminist and their coat hangar propaganda. Which likely means they have some interesting items in storage–things that 70s crowd is just forced to part with when they move to Manhattan–smaller apartments there, you know. Things like this or this. Or maybe even this–It would be painful be reminded of the Titanic when your movement is tanking right before your eyes.

_________________________

Tanya interjects: Upon first glance, Andrea, I mused that the pink couch (above) would make a great bassinet, especially seeing as colic is sometimes attributed to being separated from the comforts of the womb.  And it’s just the right size!

But on second thought, there may be a danger that pro-abortionists, finding the newborn ensconced there safely, would revoke her rights on the grounds that she has not fully emerged from the vaginal canal.

Move along, nothing to see here

by Leave a Comment

It was last week that the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that a search for drugs on school grounds violates student rights. Some were concerned this meant students, on public property, would gain an undue sense of confidence in their own authority and that it would be tougher for adults and parents to enforce just about anything.

Have a read of “Kilt trip“–the journey of a perfectly delightful writer and social commentator, Dawn Eden (I’ve heard her live) into a Canadian high school and I’m sure we’ll all agree that those concerns are ill-founded. Move along, there’s nothing to see here.

__________________________

Tanya adds: How a court even goes about disallowing drug-sniffing dogs on public property (schools or elsewhere) is beyond me.

So much for the plan to introduce gun-detecting dogs in GTA schools.  

 

Better to be sorry than safe. (That’s how the saying goes, isn’t it? I’m all confused these days.)

 

______________________________

Véronique adds: Well, really, what the judgment says is that one cannot go on a “fishing expedition” with a drug-sniffing dog in a public space. You must have grounds to believe that you will find drugs in the said place before bringing in the puppy.

My question: Isn’t being in a high school reason enough?

______________________________

Rebecca adds: Look, the reality is that minors don’t have the same rights as adults. This by no means gives schools, police or parents the right to abuse them, but it’s just silly to adduce from the use of drug-sniffing dogs in schools some sort of general collapse of civil liberties. Minors need parental permission to join the military, get married, and in some cases work – it would be an appalling breach of human rights if adults needed permission from a third party to do any of these, but most of us think it’s common sense that kids need parental guidance on some of these matters. Giving autonomous adults arbitrary restrictions on their freedom, religious worship and clothing would be fundamentally wrong and also illegal, and yet apart from some of the nuttier (and usually childless) left, nobody objects to parents giving their kids curfews, raising them in their own religion, and making an effort (often futile) to stop them from dressing like trollops or street urchins.

Of course, minors also have rights that other people don’t have, largely to do with the obligations of others (their parents, and when they fail spectacularly, the state) to provide them with food, shelter, education and basic security. The relationship between parent and child, or between someone acting in loco parentis and a child, is not a perfect parallel for the relationship between state and citizen, and it shouldn’t be.

______________________________

 

Tanya adds:

Again, though, are we then to ban drug-sniffing dogs in airports? Do we need any grounds to do so? Apparently not, says this article in today’s Gazette:

 

So may I ask what in the world the difference is?

Meta