ProWomanProLife

You are here: Home / Archives for Brigitte Pellerin

Beware the false freedom?

by Leave a Comment

So now they have young girls on television advising other young girls to keep wearing the hijab, otherwise they won’t be allowed in Paradise.

My Muslim sisters, I would like to say that a lot of films would seem to be destroying the hijab. So, my sister, you should be careful with these destroying voices, because they fight Islam, and they are against its progress. So my sister, you must keep your hijab to enter Paradise.My sisters in Europe, in America, in the whole world, I would like to advise you that your hijab protects you from this false freedom, and in fact, [Westerners] don’t understand anything except destroying their humanity, and satisfying their animal instincts. At last, let me say that the hijab is the best protection for any girl in the world. 

Where, I ask again, are the feminists?[h/t LGF]
______________________
Véronique says: On the other hand, as a pro-life advocate I have a lot of sympathy for the “beware of false freedom” speech. As “for Westerners don’t understand anything except destroying their humanity, and satisfying their animal instincts” Well, uh… who said that sin was the only religious dogma that could be proven by opening the day’s paper?

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think the veil is the way to liberation. But they do have some kind of a point, don’t they?

Is it something in the water?

by Leave a Comment

New York politicians seem to have a lot of trouble being faithful.

ALBANY, N.Y. — With his predecessor’s term doomed by a sex scandal, brand-new Gov. David Paterson tried to come clean about his own skeletons just hours after assuming office by acknowledging a years-old affair.

Paterson was sworn in almost exactly a week after allegations first surfaced that former Gov. Eliot Spitzer was “Client 9” of a high-priced call girl service. Responding to rumors circulating in Albany, Paterson and his wife, Michelle, told the Daily News of New York City that both had affairs during a rough patch in their marriage several years ago.

[…]

“We move forward. Today is Monday. There is work to be done,” Paterson said. “There was an oath to be taken. There’s trust that needs to be restored. There are issues that need to be addressed.”

Ah, yes. Moving forward. They always say that, don’t they. But forward from where?

Life sentence for killing autistic daughter

by Leave a Comment

Update on a sad case:

“Life sentence for woman who killed autistic child”

The actions of Xuan “Linda” Peng that caused the death of her daughter Scarlett were “reprehensible” said Superior Court Justice Mary Lou Benotto during the sentencing hearing.

“Scarlett was particularly vulnerable,” said Judge Benotto, who ruled that Peng must spend at least 10 years in prison before she can apply for parole after being convicted of second-degree murder this month.

I can’t help but note that if Scarlett had been killed while in the womb, nobody would have cared.

______________________

Tanya shakes her head: I can’t help but add that this woman, who maintains her innocence, is likely already in a prison far worse than the iron bars she’ll stare through for at least 10 years. With a history of mental illness, and apparently heavily medicated during her trial, 10 years in prison will do little to “reform” her. Are we not failing to meet the needs of yet another woman in this country?

______________________

Andrea adds: Hate to be the heavy, but a life sentence for killing your child sounds about right to me. This is precisely what Robert Latimer did, and I advocated for him to remain behind bars for the statement it makes. I am not saying I think their situations are exactly the same: I just don’t know, because I know few details about Linda Peng. But on the face of it–the punishment fits the crime.

A terribly embarrassing oversight on the part of the media

by Leave a Comment

hairylegs2wi_468x657.jpg

Egad. Céline Dion hasn’t waxed her thighs. And it makes the news. Surprisingly, the reporter failed to notice the chanteuse’s hair was also a touch frizzy. I think I’ll write a letter to the editor to complain about this egregious oversight.

_______________________

Andrea adds: And no one noticed that she appears to be wearing a black bag of some sort? To me, her outfit is the stuff of nightmares: Only marginally better than forgetting to dress at all.    

_______________________

Rebecca adds: Judging by the facial expression, she’s also smelled something quite terrible.    

Can we talk? Honestly, I mean?

by Leave a Comment

Any time you mention late-term abortion pro-choicers tell you a) it doesn’t happen and b) even if it did it would be in extreme cases to save the life of the mother, or something similarly reasonable. I, for one, am not so anti-abortion as to sacrifice a mother for a fetus, especially not if she already has other young children to look after.

But that’s not what we’re talking about, is it:

The number of late abortions in Britain has reached a record level, The Sunday Telegraph can reveal.

Almost 3,000 were carried out on women who were at least 20 weeks pregnant, according to the latest annual figures in England and Wales, representing a 44 per cent increase in less than a decade.

The vast majority were for “lifestyle” reasons; less than a quarter were because of a risk that the child would be born handicapped.

I wish we’d stop lying to ourselves. Late-term abortions do happen, and they shouldn’t. At least, not for “lifestyle” reasons.

________________________

Rebecca adds: I’d love to see the numbers on how many third trimester abortions are done to save the life, or health, of the mother. While it’s always better to go full term, in this day and age almost all babies born early, but in the third trimester, do alright – better than they’d fare if aborted, certainly. And any medical condition caused by the pregnancy that would threaten the mother’s life, that would be resolved by ending the pregnancy, would respond to delivery as well as to termination.

A propos nothing in particular

by Leave a Comment

I’m reading Maggie Gallagher’s 1989 Enemies of Eros and found this on page 37:

I don’t know how they can have failed to notice that, as a matter of hard empirical fact, not every woman who smiles at a man is signalling an uncontrollable desire to become his own sweet patootie. But from their point of view, it seems, men are constantly surrounded by lustful women who perversely refuse to sleep with them. (Lack of discrimination is a trait common to males of all species. As Fred Hapgood points out in Why Males Exist, male frogs and toads will inadvertently try to have sex with males, some insects court females of the wrong species, and a few particularly broadminded male flies have been spotted trying to mate with raisins. But those were the sexual liberals.)

Admit it: You smiled, too.

A vagina-friendly mayor?

by Leave a Comment

cari_nagin.gif

What does one say to this?

New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin says he is “a vagina-friendly Mayor.”

Nagin made the remark while welcoming the author of the Vagina Monlogues, Eve Ensler to the city to promote the “V-Day” celebration in New Orleans next month.

You will also, no doubt, be thrilled to hear that according to Mayor Nagin, Ms. Ensler is “doing God’s work.”

[h/t Michelle Malkin]

_____________________

Andrea adds: Brigitte, your post spurs me to reach for Edward Gibbon’s The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. I don’t know why.

Finally!!!

by Leave a Comment

Something I’ve been wanting to see for a while:

Ottawa’s Catholic archbishop says he will refuse communion to any politician who “obstinately” supports access to abortion, but only if he or she cannot be persuaded to stand down.

No, I am not religious. I am in fact something of an anti-Catholic, in good part from having grown up in Quebec (long, dull story). But it bothers me no end to see politicians profess to be good Catholics, then publicly support positions, like abortion and same-sex marriage, that are clearly against Church teachings, insisting that they have the right to interpret their religion as they see fit. No they don’t. Not in the Catholic Church. I’m glad to see the Ottawa archbishop is ready to crack down. It’s about time.  

Oh, and please spare me ridiculous lectures about the separation of Church and state. First of all, it’s an American concept. There’s no such thing in Canada, where the preamble to the Constitution (the 1982 one, not the dusty old 1867 document) says: “Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law”. And second, the archbishop isn’t trying to change Canadian laws – he may be advocating for changes he’d like to see, but we all have the right to do that, religious or not. What he’s doing is trying to apply his own religion in his own church, and last time I checked there was no constitutional right to communion.

Meanwhile in the cynical community…

by Leave a Comment

Folks ain’t none too pleased with Liberal leader Stéphane Dion’s non-position on C-484.

Sir, while you were absent from the House of Commons today, a vote was held. The vote in question allowed Bill C-484 to pass into committee. Because you saw fit not to whip your party’s vote, because it did not interest you sufficiently to attend, your leadership will now come under harsh scrutiny. This Bill is an insult to the intelligence of Canadians and a blatant attempt to undermine the ability of women to maintain the right to bodily self determination and personal autonomy. This Bill is a bald faced attempt to enshrine in law a definition of life that precedes birth and creates criminal precedent for ending that newly defined life. Mr. Dion, while I sincerely hope this Bill is killed in committee, your inaction and abandonment of Canadian women’s rights has defeated any faith I might have had for your growth as a leader. You are clearly unfit for the job.

[…]

Mr. Dion please step down. This nation will not elect you Prime Minister. You are a non-entity, a milquetoast and a flop. The Liberal Party might as well appoint a traffic cone to the leadership. At least people will take notice of a traffic cone. As for the members of the Liberal Party who saw fit to vote for the travesty that is Bill C-484, you will not be forgotten come the next election cycle.

There are others, as listed here. Whoopee-dee-doo.

Meta