Archives for March 2010

On whether or not “access to safe abortion” should be included in a maternal health plan.

The Opposition motion to include abortion in the government’s maternal health initiative failed. 144 against, 138 in favour.

These motions have no real impact, so far as I know, but they make a clear public statement. And this is one the Opposition felt, I’m quite sure, they would win.

Bottom line: Abortion activists just lost a battle. And that’s always VERY GOOD NEWS!

…because they don’t want to re-open the abortion debate.

An interesting turn of affairs. Unexpected. It takes courage to stand up and name it: For Bob Rae and the Opposition family planning includes abortion. For the Conservatives it does not.

Ah, yes. Of course they have to blame partisan attacks…

CHICAGO – The once mighty community activist group ACORN announced Monday it is folding amid falling revenues — six months after video footage emerged showing some of its workers giving tax tips to conservative activists posing as a pimp and prostitute.

“It’s really declining revenue in the face of a series of attacks from partisan operatives and right-wing activist that have taken away our ability to raise the resources we need,” ACORN spokesman Kevin Whelan said.

Wow, I’m grumpy this morning… tired of 12-year-olds on the Hill pushing for an agenda they won’t say out loud (see said G8 maternal health resolution that must not be like that nasty George W. Bush but does not include the word abortion).

Then there’s this article, whereby a lack of a spot at a government table is somehow being called censorship. No one is saying Action Canada can’t lobby, write press releases, hold a protest. No one is saying they shouldn’t exist, least of all me. I’m saying that any party and/or government should not support groups that are hostile to their vision. And in final assessment, the government should not choose an abortion-rights group to do a maternal health initiative. Government funding does not equal freedom of speech.

Let it be noted, once again, Action Canada for Population Development does not do work like World Vision does. They work to expand abortion rights. You will never have an Action Canada child pinned up on your wall, because they are too busy trying to decrease the surplus population of the earth. (That’s a quote from A Christmas Carol, if you must know, the 1951 version.)

World Vision says abortion is not part of maternal health. Who are you going to trust? Them or Bob Rae?

____________________
Véronique adds: Oh my. When I am in a good mood, this kind of stuff ruins it. Badly written, badly argued. Yet published. I mean, 12-year-olds on the Hill have been known to ruin my day on occasion but 12-year-olds I can deal with. When they behave like 4-year-olds, it’s tougher. What really turns my crank in the article, having listened to the interview on the Current, is that Andrea never suggested censorship. The comment was made by the following guest, who obviously didn’t dig the ProWomanProLife ideal. The writer whould do her homework before using big words like censorship.

Good grief:

Thousands of women demonstrated outside parliament Sunday to oppose legislation banning the marriage of girls under 17. The protesters held up banners proclaiming “don’t ban what Allah made permissible,” or “stop violating Islamic sharia law in the name of rights and freedoms.” Proposed amendments to the civil status law stalled in parliament last August after severe opposition to a government proposal that would ban girls under 17 and males under 18 from marrying. Child marriages are common, especially in rural areas, where girls as young as eight have been married off.

________________________

Véronique adds: Don’t move to Yemen. That being said, you’re safe Brigitte. Being already married. And just over 17.

From Ottawa Students for Life:

Michael Ignatieff and the Liberal Party are scheming to force the Conservative Government to promote abortion as part of Canada’s push to fight maternal and infant mortality at the G8. The G8 is an annual summit for the governments of the United States, United Kingdom, Russia, Japan, Italy, Germany, France, and Canada as well as the European Union (I know that makes 9). Canada’s Prime Minister Stephen Harper recently announced:

“As president of the G8 in 2010, Canada will champion a major initiative to improve the health of women and children in the world’s poorest regions. Members of the G8 can make a tangible difference in maternal and child health and Canada will be making this the top priority in June. Far too many lives and unexplored futures have already been lost for want of relatively simple health-care solutions.”

But the Liberals are introducing a motion in Parliament on Tuesday, March 23, 2010 that would force the Government to include abortion and contraception in this effort to help mothers and infants among the world’s poor.

Please email your Member of Parliament, as well as other Members of Parliament, letting them know that you oppose this move by the Liberals that would take a great initiative and turn it into an opportunity to force abortion on the world’s poor. There isn’t time to mail letters via snail mail, so I suggest sending a brief email. For information on finding out who your MP is and how to contact her or him see:http://4mycanada.ca/ParliamentaryContacts.html

We’d like to thanks 4MyCanada for informing us of this issue. You can read more about it and they’re call to action here: http://4mycanada.ca/Emails/20100320.html

Please contact all interested friends and family regarding this issue and encourage them to make their voice heard ASAP!

______________________

Andrea adds: Having seen the resolution, I take back this call to action. Here’s what the resolution says:

That, in the opinion of the House, the government’s G8 maternal and child health initiative for the world’s poorest regions must include the full range of family planning, sexual and reproductive health options, including contraception, consistent with the policy of previous Liberal and Conservative governments, and all other G8 governments last year in L’Aquila, Italy; that the approach of the Government of Canada must be based on scientific evidence, which proves that education and family planning can prevent as many as one in every three maternal deaths; and that the Canadian government should refrain from advancing the failed right-wing ideologies previously imposed by the George W. Bush administration in the United States, which made humanitarian assistance conditional upon a “global gag rule” that required all non-governmental organizations receiving federal funding to refrain from promoting medically-sound family planning.

Everything I stand for is based on sound medical science. I stand for the full range of family planning, which does not include abortion because abortion is not family planning. Until the opposition parties replace the word “contraception” above with “abortion”–I’d say this is all a big game.

_______________________

Brigitte isn’t too sure she understand this game, but would like to add anyway: I, for one, am not against family planning and contraception in principle. But here’s what I really don’t get: Whenever I’m in a debate with pro-choicers and the subject of “abortion used as birth control method” comes up, they deny it vehemently. Abortion is NOT used as a birth control method, they insist. It is NOT back-up contraception. So why am I getting the impression now that “the full range of family planning, etc” does indeed include abortion even though the word abortion does not appear anywhere in the resolution? Just exactly what kind of game is this?

_______________________

Andrea adds: It’s a game to lower voter turnout.

Because I’m that busy and one blog post is better than no blog post, right?

Topic numero uno, I really liked this article by Dan Gardner. First because pieces about declining birth rates written by social liberals are few and far between. And second because he is mostly right, at least about the default positions we assume when defending causes that are dear to our hearts. As a social conservative, I have to admit that I probably cry “Abortion!” more early and more often than I have to. Did abortion and contraception cause declining birthrates or did declining birthrates (or the desire for declining birthrates) cause the push for access to abortion and contraception? It doesn’t make abortion right or the fall-out from widespread use of contraceptives less real. It just means that to address the problem we have to approach it with generosity and compassion rather than shooting from the hip with the first arguments available.

Topic secundo, the Canadian Institute for Health Research is again sponsoring its Café Scientifique and a rep from Planned Parenthood Toronto will be among the panelists. Now, you have to understand that this is not a debate about contraception or abortion. Rather, it is about:

“the value of working together to study health issues that affect communities, such as homelessness, HIV/AIDS and poverty.”

Still, when they say that working together leads researchers to:

“a better understanding of the community, better research and, ultimately, better health outcomes. Working together produces lasting solutions that fit with communities”

my alarms bells go off. So I registered.

Here, Margarent Wente writes about how it’s mostly men who blog because it’s mostly men who are happy to spout opinions off without thinking.

Now I am not a man, but still had an immediate opinion that I felt compelled to share with you.

Every time I do a media interview, it is a generally harrowing experience for me involving phonecalls to family, friends, preparation, late night jogs and sleepless nights, both before and after the interview. This has gotten only slightly better over time. Writing and print are now AOK. Radio, I can cope. TV? It helps keep my weight down; I get that nervous.

For some reason I don’t experience this angst with the blogging at all. Anymore, that is. When I started as a journalist we were told we should blog and given passwords and such. I pulled myself together to do two posts in two years. Blogging annually somewhat defeats the purpose.

In short, I’m saying Margaret Wente is on to something.

And I needed to share this opinion right away.