Spector on Charest, and Margaret Wente who says relax, abortion rights aren’t threatened, and write a cheque to Planned Parenthood.

Ha!

A loving mother who kisses her child’s boo-boos may be providing more health benefits than she knows.

New research indicates that early childhood experiences can have a lasting effect on health by influencing a person’s risk for chronic inflammation, the immune reaction that is the body’s first line of defense against disease. Moms who soothe a child can help reduce stress, calming the hormones that can contribute to inflammation, the study suggests.

I wonder if it works with daycare workers?

Nope, not us:

QUEBEC – Members of the Quebec National Assembly unanimously adopted a resolution Wednesday calling on the government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper to respect free choice and access to abortion, to end its ambiguity on the issue and to stop cutting funding to women’s groups who favour abortion. Members agreed to transmit the motion to the Senate and House of Commons in Ottawa. Carole Poirier, Parti Québécois MNA for Hochelaga-Maisonneuve in Montreal presented the motion after Cardinal Marc Ouellet called for re-criminalizing abortion.

I love it when people panic like that.

But you knew I’d say that…

The Toronto Star has three hilarious stories about abortion today. Story one, story two, and story three. Methinks some folks are in danger of getting a touch hysterical. But hey, great! The more panicky they sound, the better. Like, say, this, from the first story:

Pro-lifers want to revert to the status quo ante, a time when police arrested doctors who carried out safe, therapeutic abortions and put them on trial — until they found that juries would not convict them. Then the Supreme Court struck down those anti-abortion laws.

To be honest, I don’t know what other pro-lifers want (other than the obvious). I’m sure you can find some who are in favour of prosecuting abortion doctors. But I’d be surprised if you found many. Certainly over here we’re not keen on stuff like that. And speaking just for myself, here is what I want: I want women to think of abortion as an unthinkable option – all by themselves. If more of them did, there would be fewer abortions, and that would make me very happy indeed. Other than that, I would like various levels of government to stop funding abortion (except in the very rare cases where the mother’s life truly is at risk).

I’m going to try to accomplish these things without getting too hysterical. Panicking is rarely a good strategy.

______________________

Andrea adds: Hysterical, yes. This sentence wins the “I work in downtown Toronto and have never set foot outside the shadow of the CN Tower” award:

In Canada, medicare covers legal abortions; yet we refuse the pleas of maternal health advocates [Andrea notes women overseas aren’t pleading for this, but “advocates” sure are] to continue funding safe abortions abroad — where the dangers of botched procedures are far higher. Now foreign aid groups say they have been unable to secure renewed funding from Ottawa for work that may include abortions.

This is very thinly veiled political advocacy that aims to legalize abortion, nothing to do with women’s health. If there is no access to any medical clinic of any kind, no access to electricity or to doctors, just how is it that even an abortion is going to be safe?

Incidentally, were doctors to be punished for providing abortions, I would see that as a reasonable action, rather like punishing johns for prostitution. That, alongside punishing Toronto Star editorialists for terribly inaccurate writing and severe naiveté.

It’s Saturday. There’s plenty of sunshine, a little breeze, and it’s not even cold. So of course people like me are busy thinking up strategies to go and harass women at abortion clinics. Because that’s obviously where anti-abortion (or pro-life, or anti-choice; I’m not sure which particular label I should apply to myself) sentiment leads, right? Says so right here in the paper:

Carolyn Egan, from the Ontario Coalition for Abortion Clinics, reports increased harassment of women at their sites. “We believe the Conservative government policies have emboldened and given confidence to the anti-abortion element and it’s extremely unnerving.”

Have yourselves a wonderful day!

______________________

Andrea adds: I find it funny that when women are pro-abortion, they are quoted as “women’s groups.” But when women’s groups are pro-life, they can’t figure out what to do. Couldn’t possibly be a women’s group, could it? Naaaa. We’re a front for old, white men? And they make us go and harass women in front of clinics?

Not to boast, but I have cool friends. One of them is a Vietnam vet (USMC) who lives in Southern California. He’s also a biker, with political opinions I would describe as most incorrect. (We get along just fine, me and him.)

Anyway. He’s about to embark on this really neat thing called Run for the Wall, in which bikers ride to Washington DC to honour the sacrifices and contributions of all military personnel. And like all bikers, he wears a vest full of patches. His newest one (right shoulder) says: “Where would you be if your parents believed in abortion?” I think it’s lovely. So off you go, Mark, and have a safe ride.

Looks like it’s not just babies who’ll need a safe drop-off box at hospitals. Elderly people are also at risk of being left alone in the ER by relatives who either won’t care for them or just can’t.

Crass question for you to ponder: If it’s OK to dispatch “unwanted” babies, is it OK to abandon elderly relatives who’ve become a burden? Just trying to figure out which lives deserve care and protection…

Thanks to Julie for drawing my attention to this piece by Jill Stanek. I must say I don’t understand why the American Association of Pediatrics would worry more about cultural sensitivity than, say, the health of girls. And not just physical health, either. For there is something deeply more troubling about female genital mutilation than “just” removing body parts; it’s the idea that girls and women are not supposed to experience sexual pleasure – that they are somehow dirty, or impure, if they do. It’s not just a “cultural practice”. It’s butchery, pure and simple – and if you don’t believe me, I challenge you to watch one (ditto with an abortion). So why would we put up with it, and try to minimize it instead of just saying “No way, we’re not going to tolerate that sort of butchery on American soil”? As Jill Stanek points out:

Traditionally, feminists have strongly opposed FGM, along with all of Western civilization.

But in this new age of cultural sensitivity, attempts are being made to bridge the divide, not necessarily end the barbaric practice of FGM.

For instance, there is a call to stop using the offensive term “mutilation” in favor of “female genital cutting” or “female circumcision,” both utterly inaccurate.

There is also the recent suggestion by the American Academy of Pediatrics to barter a compromise, recommending that pediatricians offer the gentler, kinder form of FGM, Type 4: pricking, piercing, or incising. In a new policy statement on April 26, AAP recommended:

“Some physicians … advocate only pricking or incising the clitoral skin as sufficient to satisfy cultural requirements. This is no more of an alteration than ear piercing. …[T]he ritual nick suggested by some pediatricians is not physically harmful and is much less extensive than routine newborn male genital cutting. There is reason to believe that offering such a compromise may build trust between hospitals and immigrant communities, save some girls from undergoing disfiguring and life-threatening procedures in their native countries and play a role in the eventual eradication of FGC.”

I should note this recommendation is currently illegal in the U.S.

It’s also a pretty stupid idea.

Hey girls, try to talk your guy into that one, just for fun:

Ultrasound could be used as a reversible contraceptive for men, according to researchers at the University of North Carolina, who say a blast to the testes safely stops sperm production for up to six months. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has provided $100,000 to push head clinical trials, the BBC reports, in hopes of offering a new method of birth control. “We think this could provide men with up to six months of reliable, low-cost, non-hormonal contraception from a single round of treatment,” lead researcher Dr. James Tsuruta said. “Our long-term goal is to use ultrasound from therapeutic instruments that are commonly found in sports medicine or physical therapy clinics as an inexpensive, long-term, reversible male contraceptive suitable for use in developing to first world countries.”

It could be me (I’ve been known to be on the crusty old goat side of things), but I find these kinds of stories drab and depressing. I mean, isn’t sex supposed to be fun?