A Canadian writes about American abortion law. Last line:

Americans may tell pollsters they’re pro-choice, but at the state level they don’t act like it.

I’m not sure Americans do tell pollsters they are pro-choice anymore, but even if they did, on the state by state level there is a lot of variation. One reason (among many) why abortion politics are so acrimonious in the States is that Roe v Wade mandates something the grassroots in many states entirely, wholeheartedly and vociferously disagree with.

The deVeber Institute would be a great place to do a summer internship. For more info, click here.

When I wrote that, it had the same rhythm as One Night in Bangkok. Two very different things.

In any event, One Day in April, reports the Ottawa Citizen, MPs will debate Stephen Woodworth’s motion on what a human being is. This is only peripherally related to the abortion debate. Naturally I’m glad this will come up in the House of Commons. I might even head up to listen. Should be good–I’m sure a number of pro-choicers will be lighting their hair on fire with the contrived sort of fake anguish that only MPs in the House of Commons can muster.

___________________

Update: That day appears to be April 26.

Should doctors be permitted to assist those who want to end their life but are physically unable?

I just voted no and you can too. Doctors should never have the right to kill patients.

Two things I’m interested in here. What was it before? (Chances are they never asked the question but my money would be on fewer men believing it is OK to assault a woman in “the olden days,” for lack of a better term) and secondly, did they ask how many women think it is OK to hit a man? Because when relationships go sour, we see plenty of that, too.

Obviously gut-wrenching and what’s the word I’m looking for–oh, it’s wrong–how young mothers were forced to put their children up for adoption against their will:

Most of the mothers interviewed for this story said the coercion was systematic: From the church-run maternity homes where accommodation was sometimes predicated on adoption and where mothers had to write a letter to their unborn child explaining the separation; to the social workers who concealed information about social assistance and who told single mothers they could be charged with child endangerment; to the medical staff who called the women “sluts” and denied them painkillers, and who reportedly tied teenagers to their beds or obstructed their view of labour with a sheet. “To the Canadian establishment, this will come as a big surprise,” said Ms. Lynn, who heads the Canadian Council of Natural Mothers, which aims to expose the negative treatment of mothers in adoption practice. “What we hear all the time is, ‘You gave up your baby.’ What I say is that, at very best, it was a tragic choice.”

And speaking of “tragic choices”–today we feed young mothers a line about how it is a rock solid choice to kill their unborn children instead of putting them up for adoption. In not too long we’ll have newspapers reporting that story.

I just saw the trailer for the movie In Time, which wasn’t exactly a blockbuster. However, the trailer is great. (Does anyone else feel like the people who make trailers are more talented than those who make movies?) This is a sci-fi movie about a world where the rich can live forever and the poor die young, because they don’t get more time allotted to them by the powers that be. Justin Timberlake, who is poor and supposed to die (I gather, please keep in mind I’ve only seen the trailer) busts free from this conspiracy and escapes with a rich woman, who can live forever. He asks her: “How can you live with yourself, watching people die right next to you?” To which she replies: “You don’t watch. You close your eyes.”

Perhaps this was a little more dramatic with the gritty soundtrack playing in the background but I thought there’s some truth there for how we live.

…Home of the crazy. And I’m a friend of our neighbours to the south.

A friend sent me this. Actually, she sent it to a group of us, one of whom is a psychiatrist, with the subject heading of “Some new patients for you, [insert psychiatrist friend’s name here]”

In any event, I am posting it for three reasons. One is because I was recently told my blog–and therefore my Facebook page is “severe.” A little fun from Ellen should lighten things up.

Two, because if the people who cared so much about Cabbage Patch Dolls/Child Beauty Pageants/Pinesol actually did something meaningful, this world would be a better place.

And finally, on the severe side of things (truly, I am fun! Why are my assessments of life and culture apparently somewhat pessimistic!?) we were not created to be this idiotic, and some small part of my soul dies when I see that not only are there lunatics out there, but there are others willing to create shows to broadcast this to the nations. And we watch them. Sigh. (“Every time you watch a reality show, a book commits suicide.”)

Another great column about the “ethicists” who wrote an article about after-birth abortion.

I chatted with Brian Lilley about this on his show last night. (This is not online, sorry, so I can’t post it. When Sun TV chooses not to post my clips I always wonder if it’s because I was so god-awful that they can’t bring themselves to. Andrea: it’s not all about you.)

Anyhoo, Brian’s first question for me was “Does this shock you?”

Not tremendously, is my answer. Because this idea is as old as the hills. Older, in fact, depending on what hills you are referring to.

Brian also worried that after-birth abortion would take hold in society.

I said I thought not. Then I went on to say how defending life is a Judeo-Christian value and one we should be proud of.

But Canada is post-Judeo-Christian. We’re so far beyond that.

So if I could do the interview again, I think I’d share Brian’s concern. Leaving our Judeo-Christian heritage behind also means leaving behind such quaint notions as “it’s wrong to throw your baby off a cliff.”

A culture that can create sanitary clinics where pregnant mothers can go to have the “products of conception” vacuumed out of their uterus ain’t too far removed from one where babies are left exposed to die on hilltops. Sorry.

Something to think about.

I feel like there must be other news going on in the whole world other than the robo-calls scandal that is dominating so much of the Canadian media’s attention.

Then I learn that’s very much true.

Jonas Himmelstrand, a soft-spoken Swede, has been forced into exile in Finland for homeschooling his children.

This was a real wake-up call/a shock for me this week. I’m used to hearing about persecution. I’m used to hearing about stupid government decisions. I’ve heard of Germans and Swedes being bureaucratically pushed around and persecuted for homeschooling. But there’s nothing like having a personal connection to drive the point home, and I had the honour of meeting Jonas Himmelstrand at my work’s conference last year.

There’s a very unfortunate mentality that can develop in people, even people like me, who were raised with a suspicion of government. (When your parents are forced to flee their own homeland because of the government, that pretty much seals the deal.)

Many Canadians still think that when someone is pushed around by government officials they may have actually done something wrong.

Lately, Canada has been giving me ample opportunity to rediscover that this isn’t true.

There was Derek Hoare in British Columbia whose daughter was taken away from him for no reason. There’s the Sansone family, where the father was arrested when his five-year-old daughter drew a picture of a gun. There’s Linda Gibbons, who has spent more time in jail than Karla Homolka for standing on a sidewalk with a sign. I could go on (and on).

Now Sweden is giving me more opportunity to rediscover why this isn’t true. I’m a little surprised there hasn’t been more attention paid to this.

Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.

We need to be keenly aware of this.

You can learn more about Jonas Himmelstrand and his work by watching this clip from the Institute of Marriage and Family Canada’s conference last year. At the very end in the question and answer session, he explains how it is that he is able to homeschool in Sweden when it is illegal. There he says “You have to be prepared to leave the country on short notice,” which is what has subsequently happened to him.

[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEED4yFltCE]