Archives for 2010

In my youth, when the new reproductive technologies were still new, I remember hearing the argument that surrogacy and certain other forms of reproductive technology would lead to the “commodification of children.”  The people discussing the issue seemed interested in that viewpoint in a academic sort of way, but most people did not seem to find that abstract risk a compelling enough reason not to allow people to realize their cherished dream of children.  We certainly wouldn’t want to tell people what they should or should not do.

Which lead us to where we are now – parents pressuring a surrogate to abort a baby following a prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome.  “The child is seen by the commissioning parents as a product, and in this case a substandard product because of a genetic condition,” said Prof. Francoise Baylis, a bioethicist at Dalhousie University.  No kidding.

So, that is what the commodification of children means in practice  – a child in utero is branded a “substandard product” of which the consumer refuses to delivery.

Contrast this impoverished view of humanity and human relationship with that of this parent of a “defective” child.  This article was written in response to the televised comments of a British advice columnist stating that “it was better to terminate a pregnancy than to condemn a disabled or unwanted child to a lifetime of emotional or physical suffering”.  But that’s another eugenics story.

Sigh.

Niqab and hot pants… oh my! (Gentle warning: the song’s lyrics, in French, are somewhat explicit, in a semi-poetic kind of way.)

[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=st38g1N5uuo&feature=player_embedded]

For the record: I don’t like it. My problem with the niqab isn’t that it’s not sexy or explicit enough.

Should abortion protestors have been allowed to put up graphic displays at Carleton?

(scroll down, poll is on the right)

Tonight is a big night in Ottawa. People, we have choices.

Stephanie Gray is debating at Ottawa University. I’d go if I could but my attendance is pretty much required at the talk I’m giving at the Laurentian Leadership Centre:

Canada has a Status of Women department. Guest lecturer, Andrea Mrozek, asks if we need to create a Status of Men department instead. Our general lack of concern for men (and marriage) will spell the end of fatherhood and families as well as the social and economic prosperity we enjoy. Ms. Mrozek reviews the decidedly politically incorrect Men and Marriage by George Gilder (1986) placing it in the context of the new millennium. Tuesday, October 5^th, 2010, Laurentian Leadership Centre, 252 Metcalfe Street, Ottawa, 7:30 to 9:00 pm

Yes, it’s bad planning from the Centralized Agency of Forces Working For Good in Ottawa And The World. But it can’t be helped now. The only bad choice is staying home.

[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeJkBQn1-r8]

These are taken from the Canadian Centre for Bio-ethical Reform’s Facebook page. I think these students are doing a very honourable thing, drawing attention to the plight of the unborn. I know their hearts and souls are in this cause, and they are the justice reformers of our age. Still, must be hard, for them and possibly their parents, too. I have great respect for them.

I don’t have many details yet but apparently four students were arrested by campus police as they set up their pro-life display at Carleton University this morning.

_________________
Rebecca adds: Wow, we’re lucky to live in a country facing absolutely no threats from terrorism, organized crime, or random violence. Because if any of those were serious problems, there’s no way police would be spending precious time arresting people for saying unpopular things, right?

_________________
Correction and Update: There’s a short article in the Ottawa Sun, here. Five students were arrested by Ottawa City Police, not campus security.

There’s a cover story in Newsweek called Man Up! (my link is to a critique of the article I appreciated), there was a story in Friday’s Globe and Mail called the Emasculated Male and I’ll be giving a talk on Tuesday night called The Status of Men:

Canada has a Status of Women department. Guest lecturer, Andrea Mrozek, asks if we need to create a Status of Men department instead. Our general lack of concern for men (and marriage) will spell the end of fatherhood and families as well as the social and economic prosperity we enjoy. Ms. Mrozek reviews the decidedly politically incorrect Men and Marriage by George Gilder (1986) placing it in the context of the new millennium. Tuesday, October 5^th, 2010, Laurentian Leadership Centre, 252 Metcalfe Street, Ottawa, 7:30 to 9:00 pm

I’ll be more or less presenting Gilder’s thesis, which I thought was pretty interesting, but which also gives me cover from the ensuing criticism. (As in “Gilder said it! Not me.” I’m still trying to weigh who Gilder offends more, men or women, and thus far, it’s a toss up.)

____________________

Rebecca adds: Correcting injustices to women is important not because they’re women but because they’re people, and healthy marriages, families, organizations and societies can’t exist if half of their members are treated badly. But the solution isn’t to treat the other half badly. And we need to hear more about the tension between the sexes from happily married people, and not from bitter divorce(e)s – the tone of any given book about men, women, marriage, divorce, parenting, heartbreak, etc tends to telegraph the author’s sex and marital status pretty reliably from the opening pages.

There will be a Genocide Awareness Project display at Carleton University this Monday. I understand most Canadians prefer to put their head in the sand on this issue, pretending it’s empowering or that the injustice simply doesn’t exist. I’m glad these students won’t let that be an option this Monday.

Here’s their press release:

CONTROVERSIAL ABORTION EXHIBIT SPREADS TO OTTAWA
Students at Carleton University Get Eye-Full

OTTAWA. This October, 4, Carleton Lifeline will re-open the abortion debate—and it will be hard to ignore them.  The students will display six 4×8 foot bloody images from the controversial Genocide Awareness Project (GAP: www.unmaskingchoice.ca/gap.html).  The GAP graphically compares abortion to historical atrocities, such as the Holocaust, and has been met with resistance most particularly at the University of Calgary. This Monday from 10am to 4pm, their exhibit will be displayed in the Quad at Carleton University.  With students passing through that area on their way to and from class, heads are expected to turn. “A university is the marketplace of ideas and we want to use that platform to show that abortion is an act of violence that kills a baby,” said club president Ruth Lobo, a Human Rights major.  “We know this exhibit is effective at changing peoples’ minds because they’ve said so.”

The students said they hope to achieve debate about abortion, and they hope their message won’t be censored. Their exhibit comes on the heels of the University of Calgary Campus Pro-Life (CPL) club’s GAP display.  Out west, the students have faced censorship attempts from U of C — from the university having them charged with trespassing (the charges were eventually stayed) to charging them with non-academic student misconduct.

“We hope Carleton upholds our rights to free speech and academic freedom and encourages healthy discussion,” said history major James Shaw. “And if people are bothered by the pictures, I ask them to consider, if there’s nothing wrong with abortion, why would a picture of it bother someone so much?” A press conference will be held on campus in the Quad at 9 am on Monday October 4th 2010.

“Feminist launches 4000 years for choice.”

I can’t do commentary on this any better than Suzanne Fortin over at Big Blue Wave:

Wait a minute: hasn’t the patriarchy always controlled women’s reproduction, and feminism was a response for that? Is this an Orwellian manipulation of history or what? And have you noted how this campaign equates abortion with choice? From the About page:

The 4000 Years for Choice project seeks to create new icons, symbols, and images about reproductive choice.

Look folks, no matter how many icons, symbols and images you create, they will ALWAYS be superimposed on the image of a dead fetus. Because that’s always the result. So no matter what kind of symbols of “empowerment” are created, they are always created against the backdrop of death and destruction. There’s no evading it. Abortion means death.

 Since they are in the business of rewriting history, I wonder why would they not celebrate 10,000 years for choice. Maybe more. Maybe before fire was created, and before the first wheel… People! Why so short-sighted? Cuz when you’re makin’ stuff up, you should use that time to get really creative.