At least that’s Ron Liepert’s talking point. He was a finance minister under Alison Redford and he’s now seeking the Conservative nomination for a new riding, Calgary-Signal Hill.
Here’s his quote from a LifeSiteNews article:
“They are laws of the land. We honour the laws of the land and it’s not appropriate at this time for Mr. Anders or any other Member of Parliament to be trying to go against the wishes of the majority and try to reopen these debates. So far as I’m concerned, it’s done and over with,” he said.
There are many reasons Liepert could have identified for not wanting to address the abortion issue. About four seconds of Googling would have resulted in a number of arguments to support shying away from tackling this gross human rights violation. It’s not that I would agree with the arguments – but hey, they’re out there. We all know they’re out there.
I just can’t believe that this is the talking point his team came up with. How many provincial and federal bills have the sole purpose of amending existing “laws of the land.” Like…almost all of them. Our elected representatives spend their days reviewing and amending “laws of the land.” This is what goes on in legislatures. On a day-to-day basis. All the time.
So how is this an argument in favour of the abortion status quo? It simply isn’t.
(Of course acknowledging that we have a legislative void when it comes to abortion in Canada. We do not have a law regulating abortion access.)
__________________
Andrea adds: Oh Ron… So lame.
by 
‘Lame’ is a good comment Andrea. I had to re read Ron Lierpert’s words because I didn’t believe that what I thought I read could have been said. Glad someone is shining a light on what may have other wise been heard as an ‘informed’ and ‘Canadian’ thought..
Strange. Signal Hill is also the name of a prolife group based out of BC.
Strange how people keep saying the law is settled. It’s never been settled–not when there was a law against abortion, and certainly not now that there are no laws at all.