Archives for 2009

A really bad example:

GRENOBLE, France, February 11, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Pro-life demonstrators outside a hospital in Grenoble France were violently attacked Sunday by abortion supporters.  NOVOpress, a French-language news agency, reports that 70 pro-life picketers outside the ‘Couple-Child’ Hospital were violently attacked by a pro-abortion mob of some 260 individuals.

A pro-life demonstration was scheduled for the early afternoon, but prior to the arrival of the pro-life demonstrators, a rowdy crowd of abortion supporters took up the designated area.  NOVOpress reports that when the pro-lifers arrived they were verbally and physically accosted.

Police intervened and remained on the scene until the pro-life demonstrators left an hour later.  Two pro-abortion activists were arrested for throwing stones.

Later, 15 of the pro-lifers were confronted in a parking lot by 90 of the pro-abortion mob.  NOVOpress reports that the pro-lifers were barraged with stones and even threatened with knives.  They took shelter in a supermarket, but that did not stop the attack, which resulted in the smashing of the window of the supermarket.

Police in riot gear arrived on the scene and the abortion supporters fled.  Police arrested but later released over a dozen of the abortion supporters, charging two with causing damages.

________________________

Rebecca adds: I’m just stunned that progressive France has a place called a “Couple-Child” hospital. Isn’t that kind of judgmental, implying that having a child should have anything to do with being part of a couple? How very un-European.

Not that making your mark is a bad idea. But moms should not feel like they’re idle when raising their kids.

A reader sent this link to a passionate and eloquent 12-year-old in what seems to be a speech about abortion to her class. Reminds me of grade five, when as part of learning about the political system, we had to organize an election. I ran for Prime Minister. I won by a substantial margin, after getting help from a lawyer-family friend who suggested I campaign on a ticket of extended recess/lunch hour and no uniforms. I might add, I was the Conservative candidate, making me not unlike our Conservative Prime Minister today–completely without principle or small-c conservative ideology, but really keen on winning. I digress–the other winning element was a friend (today a corporate lawyer) who made up a cheer to the tune of the Mickey Mouse song: “A-N-D, R-E-A, M-R-O-Z-E, K! Andrea Mrozek, (Andrea Mrozek), Andrea Mrozek (Andrea Mrozek!)”  This marks the first and last time I campaigned for office and the last time that anyone has been able to pronounce–and spell–my name properly. Good times.

Anyhoo, here’s the speech now:

[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOR1wUqvJS4]

__________________________

Tanya adds: I gave a similar speech in 7th grade (and I highly doubt I was nearly as well spoken… especially since it was for my French class). I do remember my teacher looking at me with a smile during the speech. Thinking back on it now, I wonder if it was an encouraging smile, or a condescending (we’ll see how you feel when you’re older) smile. Enh! Either way, I still feel the same now as I did then.

I have a letter to the editor in today’s Post. The original looked like this:

Though Stephanie Gray’s manner of fighting abortion is drastically different from my own, I fully support her. Gray is not saying abortion is exactly like the Holocaust or slavery. She is saying that where we fail to see people as people, atrocities easily occur—today, as in history.
At risk of sitting on the fence, I just don’t see much of a debate here. Killing our children is at the heart of abortion. And that is what is so unpopular, not the manner in which we draw attention it. Offering truly compassionate options so that women don’t have to kill their babies is one solution. Gray helps us to be compassionate insofar as she reminds us about the facts on what abortion is—facts so many today readily choose to ignore.

And stories like this one don’t help me feel better. There’s a zoo in Michigan that charges visitors to watch animals, er, mate. And it’s sold out, of course.

Hey, what if it turns out animals are heteronormative right-wing bigots?

_________________________

Andrea adds: Far be it from me to give dating advice, but this would most certainly qualify as the worst Valentine’s Day date activity, ever.

_________________________

Tanya says: To add to Andrea’s point, I wouldn’t bring a child there, either. You don’t want to know the questions I faced from my 3-year-old when we had an embarrassing run-in with some giant turtles on display at the local pet store.

One thing is certain; the birth of these infamous octuplets sure has spurred on some debate. Today’s Yahoo! poll asks, “Do fertility clinics need stricter guidelines?” The majority seem to think so (89% in fact).

Had the mother of these eight babies had a ‘reduction,’ this story would never have made the news. Having said that, I think that reproductive freedom is intended to convey the message that a woman may have as many or as few children as she wishes. It seems to me, however, that she may have ‘as few’, but her right to have many is in question.

“Calgary students union revokes anti-abortion group’s club status“.

John Carpay, a lawyer with the Canadian Constitution Foundation who is representing the group, said Campus Pro-Life’s charter right to free speech is being violated. “It’s very sad when universities and students unions seem to be disregarding the mission of the university, which is to be a place of open debate and frank discussion and free enquiry,” he said.

_______________________

Tanya draws attention to a comment left below this article:

the Charter of Rights and Freedoms does not apply to universities”

Wow, I haven’t heard a more telling phrase in years. I ran into this as a lecturer at a post secondary institution here in Edmonton as well, and was forced to resign, effectively ending my career. Such is the price for bucking the establishment. But, I still am perplexed by the logic of the argument being used, since the University of Calgary is almost entirely funded by taxpayer’s money, you would think that the rules of fair play that apply to public institutions would apply. Somehow, these publicly-funded schools are now considered “private property”! Whose, I wonder?”

I first saw Barbara Kay’s article while I was on vacation. I dutifully hid my head in the sand (not literal) and didn’t even read it. (In favour of ice cream on the beach, sorry.) Can’t do that anymore because it’s back to the cold grindstone in Ottawa.

So let me draw your attention to Stephanie Gray’s rebuttal to Barbara Kay.

Where do I stand in a nutshell: Though Gray’s positioning is drastically different from my own, I fully support her. I do not agree with Kay–Gray’s techniques are far from a waste of time. She is not saying abortion is exactly like the Holocaust. Nor is she saying that women are like Hitler (thank you, St. Mary’s students, for this vapid interpretation). She is saying that where we fail to see people as people, atrocities happen.

Nor do I think Gray’s way is the only effective way of combatting abortion.

The other story to hit my inbox while I was away was that of a botched abortion–a woman, outraged at the treatment she received when her baby was actually delivered alive–by accident–in an abortion clinic–subsequently put in a plastic bag and thrown out.

The surprising thing here is not that the baby survived and was subsequently thrown out in a plastic bag–the surprising thing is that this happens every day as a routine course of action. That we as women enjoy the “right and privilege” of going to specially sanctioned centres to kill our children. That this is killing is very, very true (Gray’s main point)–that it is not necessary, not a “right” and that it hurts women is also very, very true (my main points).

So, at risk of sitting on the fence here, I don’t see much of a battle in the pro-life world on this one. Pro-lifers–forge on (in the manner you are comfortable, which will be different for everyone). I remain 100 per cent convinced that we shall win this (and I don’t think that about any other social/cultural battle I am also engaged in). Killing babies is at the heart of abortion. And that is ultimately what is unpopular, with the women who have them, and with just about anyone and everyone out there.

__________________________

Rebecca adds: I agree that explicitly suggesting abortion is akin to the Holocaust is potentially offensive, and thus counter-productive (the point is not to get diverted into a discussion of whether the Holocaust was unique and so on), but I also agree that they are both the results of cultures in which the sanctity of human life is diminished. I’m also not sure it’s a genocide in any meaningful way; “genocide” implies a concerted effort to eliminate a specific people, and the babies aborted in Canada come from all different races, religious groups, both sexes, and range from perfectly healthy to profoundly disabled.

The one thing they all have in common is that they’re inconvenient, either for their mothers, or for their fathers or grandparents, who pressure their mothers into aborting. And I truly think we need to emphasize this: the vast majority of aborted babies are terminated because they are inconvenient. Not to save the health of the mother, not because they were conceived in rape, not because they are suffering from conditions that will result in their death anyway. The great majority of babies aborted would be joyfully borne by other women, or by the very same woman a year or two down the road, or in a different relationship.

Since starting this thing, I’ve talked about the tendency of the elite, very much including academics, to assume pro-choice=good and pro-life=anti-choice=very, very bad.

This column is a good one–about how Jojo Ruba was shouted down while giving a talk at St. Mary’s University.

Those who read Orwell’s Animal Farm will recall how discussion on the farm was quickly shut down by animals shouting, “Four legs good, two legs bad.” Well, it’s like that, and although the video doesn’t show the whole thing, (mercifully,) it goes on for 35 minutes.

There’s good news here, however. Pro-choice academics have gone unchallenged for quite a while and today across Canada we see plucky pro-life students who aren’t giving up the fight for the sake of degrees or grades. This is more than I can say for myself back in the day–and I’m impressed.

What to do when your kid drives you insane? I find this tip very cute:

THE MONA LISA

Say nothing, show no emotional reaction, and deploy a slightly amused, faintly dismissive expression that says, in effect, “Pretty good for a novice, but nowhere near good enough to get to me.” – Immediate effect The Mona Lisa will de-escalate the child’s behaviour. The child may finish the current diatribe but will probably not go on beyond that. – Long-term effect Decreases slightly the likelihood of future battles. The Mona Lisa shows the child — more effectively than simple ignoring would — that provocative misbehaviour will not get a satisfying rise out of you. – Side effects You’re asking a lot of yourself, in terms of restraint, because you will feel that you have not taught the child a lesson and that you permitted yourself to be abused, but you will have modelled restraint, the very behaviour you wish to teach here.

__________________________

Tanya adds: Hey Brigitte… have you ever tried this on an adult? It works rather well!