Women’s rights and equality rights received an affirmation this weekend.  Delegates at the Conservative Convention voted to put the condemnation of female feticide back on the agenda, as an official party position.

Outside in the snow, these people celebrated.

Through November, Adoption in Canada hopes to raise awareness about choices in infant domestic adoption and to support birth-parents who have made that choice.

“[Birth-parents and their adopted children] deserve compassion and support,” says Anastasia Bowles, Project Manager for AdoptioninCanada.ca. “We hope to see more of the many positive stories about adoption, so people will know that adoption can truly be a loving, positive choice.”

Adoption is the loving option for sure, though it requires resilience and selflessness on the part of the birth-mother.  The stories of adoption are many and heartfelt.

If you support adoption, “like” AdoptioninCanada.ca on Facebook and visit the site.

When Mark Warawa introduced Motion 408, to end female gendercide in Canada, he quoted this 2011 Environics poll extensively.

The poll cites 92% of Canadians believe that gender selection abortion should not be legal.  But that number represented the general population.
Amongst Conservatives, that number was 96%.
Among those who believe that abortion should be legal up to birth, 85% thought that gender selection abortions should not be legal.

In light of those numbers, there should be a whole host of people, who are both pro-life, and pro-abortion, and pro-woman for that matter, at THIS RALLY in Calgary, outside the Conservative Convention, that is taking place over the weekend.

The rally starts at 9:00am on Saturday, and you even get a free lunch.

Watch this little guy cry at his mother’s singing.  Just seeing the emotion in his face brought tears to my own eyes.

Since I’m on the subject of euthanasia, I thought that I’d just mention that Bill 52 received “approval in principle” from the Quebec National Assembly yesterday. This is similar to Second Reading, and means the bill now goes to committee for study.  So hold on to your bootstraps, everyone.

However, according to my sources (I just say that to make it sound official), all it not lost just yet as some of those “yay” votes were in fact “nay” votes.  The reason being that they wanted the bill to pass Second Reading to get it to committee where is can be worked on and fixed.

And some people who we have not heard from till now, are being called out of the woodwork to speak to this issue, clarifying what those nasty little terms like “terminal palliative sedation” and “medical aid in dying” really mean.

Philippe Couillard, the leader of the Quebec Liberal party and a former neurosurgeon, stated in a press conference yesterday that Bill 52 does not have sufficiently strict guidelines.  More on that subject here.

This video from the Christian Medical and Dental Society gives a different perspective on the euthanasia issue – definitely worth viewing.  It shows the human side of suffering, that it can be used to make us better, to purify our love, to prepare us for another place.  Most importantly it shows two people who didn’t fear the end of life, and didn’t resorting to killing as a means of coping with their pain.

See the video here.

As Quebec wades into ‘end of life care’ with their vote (2nd reading) today, LifeCanada issued this press release, noting that a majority of Quebec residents are NOT in favour of what the government terms “medical aid in dying” (a euphemism for euthanasia).

Specifically, in the poll conducted by Abingdon Research (October 23-28), 47% said Bill 52 requires further study, while another 14% expressed opposition to the idea of allowing doctors to kill their patients. Only a minority 35% were in favour of the bill.

Respondents were concerned with the actual rate of ‘non-consensual patient terminations’ (aka death without knowledge of the fact that you are about to be snuffed out) that has occurred in other jurisdictions, like Belgium, for instance.  Doctors (and nurses) actually admit to killing their patients without their consent, in about 1/3 of the actual REPORTED euthanasia deaths that occur in that country.  Bearing in mind that there would be a percentage of doctors who would not report their acts of “non-consensual patient terminations”, for fear that the authorities who are supposed to be minding the “safeguards” might actually take notice.

Here’s a little quote: (see article here)

The researchers found that a fifth of nurses admitted being involved in the assisted suicide of a patient.

But nearly half of these  –  120 of 248  –  also said there was no consent.

‘The nurses in our study operated beyond the legal margins of their profession,’ said the report’s authors in the Canadian Medical Association Journal.

It is likely many nurses ‘ under-reported’ their involvement for fear of admitting an illegal activity, the study said.

But it added that many were probably acting according to their patients’ wishes, ‘even if there was no explicit request’.

That’s consoling…  the patient “probably” wanted to die, even though they didn’t actually ask for it.  I think this illustrates very nicely one of the problems with legalizing euthanasia – in the eyes of those administering it, it actually becomes a medical act that needs to be prescribed.  And the doctor always knows best.

Keep in mind that Bill 52, the Quebec Bill to legalize euthanasia, is actually modeled on the Belgium law.

I always love running into Andrea at pro-life, pro-family events. We live on virtual opposite ends of the country so it’s a treat to see her. The Conference has done its job, namely to re-invigorate us, so I feel inspired to get posting again on PWPL. The Conference is well underway and has been a great success.

Dr. Wally of MaterCare International whom Andrea refers to is well worth noting. He does incredible work in Africa, attending to women in desperate need of obstetric care. His work with pregnant women in Africa, setting up both the clinics and the infrastructure to get women to them, is an amazing feat.

Death from the lack of proper care to women having their babies is a very prevalent problem – in fact 91% of those deaths occur precisely because they cannot get care during the last trimester of pregnancy and birth. What is even more tragic, however, is that his appeal to the Canadian government for aid (from CIDA) has fallen on deaf ears for years now.

MaterCare International has frequently been asked to brief government officials about this issue, but has never been given a cent in aid money. Instead, funding has gone to Planned Parenthood and other organizations whose only mandate is to provide contraception and abortion.

What exactly is Obama talking about when he tries to tell America that Planned Parenthood provides services to women like “mammograms”?

Not only is Planned Parenthood almost totally mired in the “family planning” industry (read abortion & contraception), I’m wondering what other services are being offered when they cannot even perform mammograms?

The truth is the FDA has no record of a PP facility being authorized to perform such procedures. Under the federal Mammogram Quality Standards Act, administered by HHS, “[n]o facility may conduct an examination or procedure…involving mammography” without a certification from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and the FDA records all certificates and investigates facilities holding them. If Planned Parenthood could perform mammograms, the FDA (and HHS) would know it.

LiveAction does an amazing job of outing this particular Presidential lie with calls to PP clinics to see if they perform said mammograms. Have a listen!

I was all ready to do an interview this afternoon for CTV’s PowerPlay – a great opportunity to discuss the vote last night on Motion 312 and all the fall-out that has since taken place.

But alas, there was no one on ‘the other side’ that would step up to the plate and discuss the issue.  The young woman arranging the interview really did give it a valiant go, I do believe that.  But despite my own willingness to participate, there was a sense that we certainly couldn’t have me do the interview all alone.  Representing the views of a pro-life individual without anyone to challenge them is a BIT much!

I think, if anything has been made clear throughout these months leading up to yesterday’s vote, it is that the “other side’ really is not in favour of the democratic process.  They are terrified of the debate, terrified of  what medical science might reveal, and hold onto their decades-old feminist screed more dogmatically than any religious fanatic I have ever come across.

So the interview was cancelled.  ‘Tis a pity, cause I also wanted to show off my big, 38-week, pregnant belly (containing my child which according to Section 223 is not a human-being; something that I find grossly offensive).