Andrea Mrozek – Page 230

Nothing to add here

December 9, 2008 by Andrea Mrozek 2 Comments

Excellent article by Jonathan Kay in today’s Post.

One of the lamentable results of the culture wars is that women have been taught to regard abortion — a medically profound event that either kills, or pre-empts, a unique, genetically determinate human being–as if it were merely an act of feminist self-empowerment. …

A “right to choose” means nothing if women don’t also have a right to be informed.

This is the height of hypocrisy of self-described “women’s rights” advocates who advocate for unfettered access to abortion. I have asked different abortion advocates on three different occasions what precisely abortion does and they avoided the question, defaulting to “I don’t know” or on one radio show simply saying “it is what it is.” Abortion “is what it is”. (Does that depend on your definition of “is”?)

I say hiding behind euphemisms isn’t a way to advance women’s rights. And for that, I’m called a misogynist.

___________________________

Brigitte says ‘me too’: You can call me a misogynist if you want. I’m with Andrea.

On social taboos

December 9, 2008 by Andrea Mrozek 1 Comment

A woman has a baby at age 70. Bravo?

IVF has revolutionised the way we look at infertility,” said Bishnoi. “Infertility is no longer a social taboo or a divine curse. It can be treated scientifically.”

I disagree. Clearly infertility is still a huge social taboo when you have a woman toughing out IVF at 70–out of sheer desperation for a child she won’t be able to pick up or care for because she is too old. This ain’t no success story, that’s for sure. (And while I’m ranting, neither are the 45-year-old Hollywood types doing the same thing.)

Let me in on the secret

December 7, 2008 by Andrea Mrozek Leave a Comment

I have at least three friends–who are pro-life stalwarts and really love Obama. I want to know what they know.

Read this in yesterday’s Post.

President-elect Barack Obama has pledged to unite the country, but a promise he has made on abortion rights threatens to fan the flames of a ferocious culture war and herald “one of the most divisive periods in American history.” Mr. Obama said during his campaign that one of his first acts as president would be to sign into law the Freedom of Choice Act, a bill that both supporters and opponents say would go far beyond the landmark Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade, which made abortion legal in 1973.

I don’t personally believe the first act Obama signs will be the Freedom of Choice Act, as he has said it will be. If it is, with all that is going on in the world, then he’s a fool. And while I’m sure Obama is not pro-life, I’m also sure he’s not a fool.

Last day to vote

December 6, 2008 by Andrea Mrozek Leave a Comment

I think today’s the last day to vote for PWPL in the Best New Blog category at the Canadian Blog Awards. In case that’s something you would like to do.

What the Lakehead University pro-life club accomplished

December 6, 2008 by Andrea Mrozek Leave a Comment

Reporting live here from Thunder Bay. I gave a little talk to a dinner audience last night, here at the Thunder Bay pro-life conference. I mentioned at the dinner that freedom of speech and winning hearts and minds toward the pro-life cause go hand in hand. This is why it is a major strategy of the student unions to ban or limit the clubs. (The pro-life message, done well, is very compelling so the best thing to do is ensure it doesn’t get out there.)

I mentioned that it takes a great deal of courage for pro-life students to stand up to the student union bullies. I’d like to really stress this: it takes more courage than you think. You are young, trying to get a degree, taking on an unpopular cause… it’s not outside the realm of the possible that some professor decides you shouldn’t pass. Or then there’s just the social climate in which you are living and breathing. Needless to say, back when I was a student, I didn’t have that courage and didn’t involve myself in this type of club activities.

These guys have garnered a lot of mainstream media–simply because they were willing to be vocal. And that does everyone a service, and provides an example.

As for the conference, I only arrived close to the end of the day yesterday, and things are just starting today. On that note, I’m off to get ready for the day.

What I’m reading these days

December 6, 2008 by Andrea Mrozek 2 Comments

(The title might better be “What is on my night stand these days” but let’s not quibble over details.)

This idea is stolen from Paul Tuns over at Sobering Thoughts. I see your good idea, Paul, and I up you one, by providing a visual of my teetering reading pile.

Starting at the top: there’s Edith Wharton–the last novella I read was really very good–called “Old Maid”–please hold your very, very funny jokes on whether that has anything to do with yours truly; next, a Chesterton compilation; next, a travel New Testament; after that, just your standard, run-of-the-mill Moravian Liturgy, (no need to explain that because everyone has one, no?); then, the inspirational biography of William Wilberforce; Culture Shift by Mohler–alas, I’ve never cracked that one open but there it is; two books on pro-life feminism, thanks to Toronto Right to Life after I gave a talk; The Complete Novels of Jane Austen–who I am told, I should like. (Should being the operative word there. By the time I’ve figured who is who and why I care, well, I’m asleep faster than you can say “Moravian Liturgy”.) Care of the Soul was a quick purchase. I thought I was getting Thomas More when actually I was getting Thomas Moore, a not inconsequential difference of a couple hundred years. Finally, no time like the present to learn some Canadian history with Right Honourable Men by Michael Bliss.

Why I’m going to Thunder Bay

December 4, 2008 by Andrea Mrozek 4 Comments

Because of nonsense like this:

Clubs at Lakehead University must make their messages “positive,” cannot be seen to be offensive or disparaging and they are not allowed to impose their views on anyone else, new amendments to the student union constitution say. …

But a campus anti-abortion group, which has been trying to gain official status since 2007, believes the new rules make it impossible for them to ever spread their message effectively — even if they ever did get club status.

“[The student union is] working to create a simple happy world, where expressing a single critical thought that may upset anyone is banned, and where [student union] will be the final arbiter of what is acceptable,” said a release from Lakehead Life Support this week.

The new amendments state:

* “Campaigns must be positive in nature and cannot slander the opposing stance of the campaign.”
* “All club publications shall not have content that may be deemed as offensive or in bad taste to any identifiable group.”
* “Members of the club are not allowed to impose belief(s) or practice(s) of the club to anyone who does not give them consent to outside of the club’s meetings.”

Isn’t academic freedom grand?

I’d say drop in on the conference if you are “in the area” but another reason why I really wanted to go and support these students when they asked is because, let’s face it, who is ever in the area of Thunder Bay?

On a side note, I’ve always loved Terry Fox and I am going to see his memorial.

___________________________________

Rebecca adds: Homeschooling is all well and good, but what we really need is home-universitying. I need to start saving up for Claremont College tuition.

“Women’s rights” in crisis

December 4, 2008 by Andrea Mrozek 3 Comments

From time to time in this current political mess, someone will toss the phrase “women’s rights” into the mix. Apparently, in saying that government employees can’t go to Human Rights Tribunals over pay equity disputes, the Harper government is against women’s rights. I think that’s what it is about, anyway. Hard to tell. Why? Because those people bandying about the phrase don’t have a sweet clue either. They never explain, and I’ve not heard a reporter ask for or offer clarification. Fortunately, however, they don’t need a sweet clue. Because paying lip service to “women’s rights” is all they want to do.

Look, one thing I won’t do on this blog is pretend to represent all women. So let me say this for myself. I’d really love the government to stop funding “women’s rights.” I want Status of Women Canada to lose every tax dollar it gets. I’d love it if the “women’s caucus” stopped defending things like “gender-based analysis.” I will never even bother reading The Pink Book.

I don’t represent all women. So I find it fascinating when others speak up for–wait for it–me. Why–Ed Broadbent did so just the other morning on a local Ottawa CBC show. The Conservatives are against “women’s rights”, says he. But just what might those rights be? The right to unionized jobs? The right to be defended by him? So kind of him–I’ll invite him to tea and we can chat about a coalition of women’s defence. I’m sure he, maybe with Duceppe and Dion can swing it.

“Women’s rights” indeed. Are you buying it?

No suprises here

December 2, 2008 by Andrea Mrozek 1 Comment

Two new studies out, both showing negative repercussions for women’s mental health after abortion. Both are done by reputable scientists and published in peer-reviewed journals. Here’s the press release for the Fergusson et al study. And here’s the Coleman et al study.

________________________

Tanya adds: The Fergusson study: “Women who have an abortion face a 30% increase in the risk of developing common mental health problems”

It then says, with its next breath: “The study found, the overall population effects of abortion on mental health are small.”

What? Nice.

Meta