Sympathy levels remain high for Robert Latimer. But if Canadians knew the truth about his daughter’s situation–and about him–would they still feel that way?
This story in Maclean’s is excellent for showing Latimer’s true colours.
I’ve heard Jack Kevorkian has been a boon to the anti-euthanasia movement–because he’s just that extreme. Perhaps Latimer might do the same in Canada?
Recently, the York Federation of Students cancelled an on-campus abortion debate just five hours before its scheduled start time. Gilary Massa, vice-president equity for YFS, told Maclean’s the debate would be discussing taking away women’s rights. She also compared an abortion debate to one about whether or not beating women should be allowed.
But don’t go thinking the YFS is pro-censorship. The day after the debate’s cancellation, Massa led York delegates to McMaster University to protest that institution’s infringement on free speech.
The YFS and several other student unions rallied to condemn McMaster for censoring a controversial poster containing the phrase “Israel Apartheid” and a violent graphic. The various student unions called for McMaster to allow absolute free speech on its campus.
Thank you. The abortion debate is not over. That’s not what the Supreme Court said. They said there is such a thing as fetal rights, and we ought to have Parliament decide.
It is a start to simply get the word out that the Supreme Court of Canada was not opposed to fetal rights. My job is to show Canadians that granting fetal rights is not opposed to women’s rights. This is not an either/or scenario. Women will thrive when their babies do too.
Statistics Canada says we do late term abortions. The women at the decidedly pro-abortion conference at UofT law school in January said in 2003 there were 320 abortions done at over 20 weeks gestation, 401 in 2004. (If that’s not late term enough for you, I suggest taking a look at some fetal development photos.)
This comes up again–and will clearly come up again and again–this time because Carolyn McLeod, professor of women’s studies and philosophy at Western says the Life Canada billboards are false. She’s not telling the truth, and she must know it. So the question is why?
Perhaps she has seen the photos of what a 20 week old baby looks like and has problems justifying our collective, cultural decision that these babies are disposable. Easier to say it just doesn’t happen.
So in the end, I take heart from her denial. Because it means she can’t stomach the reality. And no one should be able to do that.
Aaaw, it’s a day of appreciation for abortion providers. Hard to make abortion warm and fuzzy, but they’re trying.
At least one person is celebrating. Have a read here.
A great comments section this week. Check it out, here.
Loved this column. And I say that as a policy analyst.
When I’m not blogging for PWPL, I’m a social policy analyst on the marriage and family beat. So when a friend passed on this article by Lori Gottlieb in the Atlantic Monthly, I read it with interest and truthfully, an increasing sense of despair.
You’d think, being the pro-marriage kind of gal that I am (marriage, properly understood, is both liberating and offers protection; it allows families to flourish and in the two-person Mom and Dad form nurtures strong, healthy children) that I might just agree with the author. She suggests women ought to focus on marriage sooner, they ought “to settle.”
And if marriage is such a good thing, why wouldn’t this just make sense?
But marriage as she considers it is not always a good thing. Her understanding of marriage is limited to the “What’s in it for me?” variety. What’s in it for her is something slightly more elevated than the usual romantic pap. She now wants a father for her child. (Quite poignantly, she describes at one point how marriage offers a partner to watch your toddler so a mother can grab a bite of lunch.)
She as a single mom of one artificially conceived son (ie. fatherless) now sees how valuable marriage is.
I could forgive her for getting things backwards, on purpose, but I can’t quite forgive her for giving other women bad advice out of her own feelings of desperation. In the whole article, she never uncovers what marriage actually is.
This article does a lot better. Referring to the Atlantic Monthly piece, she writes:
If only she had been brave enough to inquire into the nature of true love and not dismiss it in a throwaway line (“whatever that is”) she might have done her sisters a real service. Instead, she has tried to persuade us that love can be put in brackets while we persist in our twentieth century habit of getting what we want. Perhaps few people will be swayed by her argument; certainly, no-one will be helped…
And that’s the truth: Gottlieb’s article on first glance is a good read, and seems credible. And to be fair, she highlights quite a lot about marriage that is true. What’s more important, social liberals will listen because of the source. She’s not sitting pretty as a married mom of 2.2 children, with a white picket fence and a van in the suburbs.
But her piece does not help anyone get at the truth of what marriage is. Marriage is not a compromise, it’s not “infrastructure” (exclusively) for children and most importantly, marriage is not and never will be a contract, as so many libertarians are fond of saying. On the academic side, I know a whole lot about marriage; that’s not to say I know anything at all. But in considering marriage, we simply cannot do it from a selfish angle.
If you read the Atlantic Monthly piece, be absolutely sure to follow it up with Mercator Net’s piece; lest the single women in the crowd be pushed toward a sad state of depression and anxiety completely unnecessarily.
Why it’s International Women’s Day, of course.
ProWomanProLifers don’t look to international, top-heavy, unaccountable bodies to guard their rights. (The United Nations can support women’s rights about as well as they guarded against genocide in Rwanda.)
Véronique adds this:
Here’s my $0.02 on Women’s Day. Now that my oldest daughter is teetering on the verge of adolescence, the dizzying task of helping her come to term with her femininity in ways that are emotionally, physically and spiritually healthy looms large in my mother-eyes. Women’s rights, self-affirmation and confidence in one’s abilities start early, especially if that girl must grow-up in a culture of early sexualization, where girl-power means the power to turn men on and self-expression means being available for intercourse (think I’m making this up? Check this out: Shut up, girls, and let your genitals do the talking…).
With all this doom and gloom, I still have great conversations with my daughters about love and sexuality, body image and romance…Another important battle front is the education of our boys. Having two of them, I am constantly reminded that they will also play an important role in upholding gender equality and the dignity of women. Women’s Day at my house is an ongoing event. It started with an exclamatory “It’s a girl!” in an Ottawa-area delivery room almost 12 years ago.
So who does look to anti-democratic bodies to support their rights? These ladies do. They’re the ones who have their knickers in a knot because of the anodyne Unborn Victims of Violence Bill. The ones who guard abortion rights without ever thinking about what those “rights” are. The ones who, across the country are trying to silence women like us.
So in honour of International Women’s Day, I’m changing one of the categories on this site. You’ll note the former category “Feminism” is now “Feminist nonsense”-a home for all the tired and ridiculous assertions of the old-school, pro-abortion 1960s feminist crowd. It’s Michelle Malkin’s idea-and I like it.
I hope our readers continue to enjoy the thought-provoking content of our non-feminist ProWoman team. And happy International Women’s Day!
(Cross-posted to The Shotgun.)
These posters were “accidentally approved” and then removed because the University of Victoria just wants “everyone to feel comfortable.” Really? Everyone?
Read about it here.