Morgentaler has his Order of Canada.
Time for the other members of goodwill to give theirs back as Jon Kay suggests they might in this piece.
Conferring such a prestigious award on Dr. Morgentaler would be a huge mistake — one, I expect, that will be greeted by the clink-clink of dozens of current OC holders returning their medals and pins. One wonders whether the Order of Canada would ever reclaim its former prestige.
It’s Canada Day–but hard for some of us to celebrate. Here’s the latest story on the Morgentaler Order of Canada saga.
_________________________________
Brigitte shakes her head in dismay: Amazing. Not that supporters (including in government, in the GG’s office and at the Supreme Court) of Dr. Morgentaler would continue to push for their hero to be honoured no matter what kind of opposition his nomination invariably generates. That I can understand; if you believe abortion is a good thing, then obviously Dr. Morgentaler is your hero and you want him rewarded for what he’s done. What I don’t understand is this tone of shocked surprise at the discovery that not everybody in Canada believes abortion to be a good thing. I read that Globe article and found myself wondering whether the authors had ever even met a reasonable and articulate pro-lifer; the piece read like something meant to explain an unaccountably bizarre human ritual to visiting aliens.
Read them, here.
10. Can there be any debate? Once and for all, Canada’s elite are pro-abortion.
9. Canada’s elite can teach you how to think. It’s amazing. We are all unconflicted about abortion now.
8. When said elite knows there will be a public outcry and condemnation of honoured person in question, they’ll choose to bestow that mighty honour on a day when the better part of the country has escaped all modern communication, preferring instead to sit with a beer by a lake somewhere. Heck, even I almost missed this one, and I care deeply about this issue. My fellow Canadians are smart—a beer by a lake sounds perfect. In perpetuity. (Why oh why is the per cent of voters declining?)
7. The Conservative Party of Canada doesn’t care one bit about this issue.
6. Abortion is not private. The Order of Canada takes the thing to a whole new public level.
5. Men certainly can speak out on abortion—Morgentaler has and boy, did it ever work.
4. Canada is not as tolerant as we’d like to believe. (The essence of this award is to stick it to those across Canada who remain rightly conflicted on the topic of abortion.)
3. If enough Canadians protest an award, the person in question will most certainly get it. I am going to nominate—and then vociferously protest—someone I like.
2. Getting the Order of Canada is now officially, not an honour.
1. Abortion is not a closed question. Hold on for the ride, folks—this one ain’t over til it’s over. When the pro-abortion elite in the Governor General’s office raise this issue over a Canada Day holiday, well, let’s thank them. Nothing is sacred now.
The entirety of this post is from a doctor who wrote in:
If Morgentaler gets this Order of Canada, it goes without saying that this is the greatest disgrace for this most prestigious award. However, the main issue at stake is that it makes abortion into something good. Until now, even for extremist pro-abortion people, abortion was seen as a tragedy where women had a choice to ‘terminate’ their offspring with the help of the medical profession. But now, it has been glorified to the point of making evil into good. Its main defender may be made a national hero.
How can I accept this? Impossible. I would share with you four episodes to which I was personal witness during my medical training.
You be the judge if they can be considered a good.
1) During one of my ICU rotations, a woman in her late seventies had just suffered a major medical crisis. She was very agitated, but we did not know why. We suspected it was her medical problem; however, the clinical signs did not fit together. I spent sometime talking to her and what she confided to me was she wanted to talk to a priest before dying. She then volunteered that while teenager she had had an abortion and she was very tormented by this. We managed to get her a priest and she was more at peace after that.
2) While doing outpatient medicine, I saw a single-African-Canadian mother. She was pregnant and she was asking for advice on how to handle her situation. I asked her if she wanted to keep the baby. She said this is what she wanted. I re-assured her that we were going to help her with her choice. I referred to our social worker. One week later when I returned to the clinic, I approached the social worker for follow up with the case. With a smile and beaming with pride, she said: “I convinced her to have an abortion and referred her to the abortion clinic..after all; this is the best choice for her.” I was left speechless.
3) Doing a chronic pain clinic, I saw a single-African-Canadian mother suffering from fibromyalgia. She was involved in a physically abusive relationship and she would not stop crying. The medical team was having hard time managing her pain, and the medical specialist made clear to us it was due to her difficult social situation. The doctor shared with us the story: she was pregnant and had two little girls at home but the boyfriend did not want the baby. So at 24 weeks pregnant she was referred to a tertiary care hospital for a late term abortion. First they killed the baby with medication and then they gave her inducers to deliver the body. She was waiting in her hospital room to start the ‘labor’ and then she needed to go to the bathroom. While in the bathroom, strong labor contractions ensued and the pain specialist then told us: “suddenly, the ‘thing’ felt to the floor and it was a boy”. Needless to say, the poor woman had been traumatized since then.
4) And the last one to illustrate that even pro-abortion people know what is wrong. One of my supervisors, staunchly anti-religious (especially anti-catholic), but otherwise very nice, shared with me the story of his wife aborting their first child who suffered from Down Syndrome. He admitted the experience had been harder for his wife than for him. Later, when his second child, a ‘normal’ daughter, was four months, she got really sick requiring intubation and ICU admission. There was a significant danger that she might be left with cerebral damage after this medical crisis. He told me: “it was as if the Universe was getting back to us for aborting our firstborn.”
Re.: Morgentaler getting the Order of Canada–each question Douglas Farrow asks in this piece will hang over our heads for as long as he has this “award.” But I think the best question is this one:
Third, what business has the committee making such a controversial award, when it so gravely affronts a very substantial number of Canadians and, indeed, deeply offends their consciences? Some argue that this “brave” man must not be denied his reward for bringing down an unjust law restricting abortion. But many others argue that the real injustice is that Canada, thanks in large part to Morgentaler and his disciples, has no law at all against cutting up babies in the womb — indeed it is the only “civilized” country without such a law. Does the committee presume to settle this national argument for us? How else are we to read their decision to make the award? And what does that say about the state of democracy in Canada?
____________________________
Tanya adds: Democracy? Not sure. But this prestigious award is allowing itself to be surrounded by scandal and controversy. In what way does this tarnish the image of The Order of Canada?
If Morgentaler truly is recognized with the award, one thing is certain. He and all those routing for him should be reminded that the pride and satisfaction that normally come along with receiving the award should be denied.
For the first time in the Order of Canada’s history (as I understand it) the award will be presented without the unanimous approval of the committee. One shouldn’t even want to win it this way.
…and it looks like it could be Morgentaler. These rumours are floating around the web. Here’s some info behind the rumour.
On Friday, the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) sent out “Order of Canada talking points” to Conservative Members of Parliament and said that tomorrow, June 30, the Governor General will issue new awards. Nowhere in that email did it say who will get an award, but sources tell me Dr. Henry Morgentaler will be among the recipients.
The talking points were meant to show process–how the decision works, and that Cabinet does not have anything to do with this decision. It sounds as though they are preparing for the pending outcry.
Many questions remain: Why now? Why not part of the official process back in February? Was protocol routed to do this? And finally, though I only chose to blog about this when I had confirmation from different sources, will it prove true?
Happy Canada day, all.
___________________________
Andrea updates: This is not a rumour. Morgentaler is definitely getting the Order of Canada tomorrow.
Political staffers with a “parl.gc.ca” email address (ie. everyone who works on Parliament Hill) received the following email this afternoon in both official languages:
Dear Colleagues,You have perhaps noticed the poster in the window of 106 East Block
that says, “Defend Life”. I have been told that this is Mr. Anders’
office. Below is the letter I have sent him. If you believe, as I
do, that there is enough politics on Parliament Hill without putting
posters in windows, I encourage you to let Mr. Anders know your views.
Dear Mr. Anders:
I work in East Block and have noticed that in the window of your
office, looking on to Parliament Hill, there is a poster-sized sign
that says — in only one of Canada’s official languages — “Defend
Life” with a Knights of Columbus logo.In the ten years since I have worked in Parliament, I have never seen
a sign in a window on the hill. I respectfully request that you
remove it.All of us who work here are passionate about politics and specific
political issues. But if we all start to decorate the exterior of
our windows as you have done, in no time, our parliament buildings
will look like a collection of university frat houses.These beautiful Parliament buildings, where we are privileged to work,
constitute a historic and democratic space that belongs to all
Canadians — past, present, and future. As employees on the Hill, we
have ample opportunities to further our political beliefs. We don’t
need to put messages in windows.Thank you in advance for your action to keep our workplace beautiful
and respectful of all of us who spend our days here, and those who
come from across the country and around the world to visit.Very sincerely yours,
Amélie Crosson
Communications Advisor, Office of the Honourable Jim Munson, Senator
(Ottawa- Rideau Canal)
I have not seen the offending sign. But I’d hazard to say Rob Anders did do something wrong: He ought to know that Quebec has the highest abortion rate in the country, and therefore the sign should be first and foremost in French.
I’d also add this: As with every other moment of offence taken when the “A word” is concerned, tis not parliamentary aesthetics that bother this staffer. It’s the issue.
Freedom of speech doesn’t mean you always hear or see what you want to. If any letters of protest ought to be written, they sure shouldn’t go to Mr. Anders.
________________________
Brigitte adds/Brigitte ajoute: Boy, is this language thing annoying/Mosus, que cette manie d’être si sensible sur les questions linguistiques est ennuyante. [I’ll stop right here.] So is the hypersensitivity to anything that might perhaps remind pro-choicers that there could potentially be something not right about abortion on demand. Look, if there is a rule against posting signs outside your Hill office, then it should apply to all signs, including this one. I don’t know whether there is such a rule, being lucky enough not to work in politics. But if there is, shouldn’t it be up to the people in charge of parliamentary decorum to make sure it is respected, not individual staffers?
________________________
Andrea ajoute: If there is an anti-sign rule, then so be it, down comes the sign. But does it require lines and lines of flowery language to every staffer, declaring this a space available to all Canadians bla bla bla bla to do so? Or does it just require one short email to the person who removes signs? Methinks the latter. Point of interest: It probably did not occur to the sender that there are indeed people, those privileged to work in that historic and democratic space (add emphasis for dramatic effect) who actually want to see a “Defend Life” sign in the window.
____________________________
Tanya remembers: Frat house…no kidding! This is just like the time Belinda Stronach put up that New Kids on the Block poster. (Just picking an easy, recognizable target…nothing personal.)
I mean, ‘original series debut.’ (Wow, those Freudian slips really sneak up on me sometimes.)
‘The Secret Life of the American Teenager‘ premiers this Tuesday on ABC Family. To summarize:
Good-girl band geek Amy is smart, talented…and pregnant. Super-Christian cheerleader Grace wants to wait until she’s married. As their secrets start to spread to the parents and to friends like bad-boy Ricky and wild-child Adrian, everyone’s secrets and stories start to come to the surface.
Having a field day blaming Juno, Jaime Lynn Spears, and Angelina Jolie for the increased rate of teenage pregnancy as of late, these same finger pointers are sure to make this new show the scapegoat of choice, especially if it’s a hit.
Funny thing is, for every finger you point at someone else, there are three pointing back at you (bet you never heard that one before).
Not to be outdone, NBC will present a new reality series this fall. Based on a British show by the same name, ‘The Baby Borrowers‘ is the result of a collaboration between The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy and the television network.
Remember when reality TV was just about getting voted off? Ah, the good ol’ days!
Well thank goodness I’m not the only one who found Obama’s Father’s Day speech contradictory. Tony Perkins of The Family Research Council poses this question in a 30 second ad:
If, as you say, fatherhood begins at conception, when does life begin?…If I became a father at conception, when did Samuel here [points to baby in his lap] become my son?
Between you and me, the question sort of answers itself, don’t you think?
[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCm8a5e47Kw&eurl=http://www.frcaction.org/]