It is very hard for us, living today, to grapple with human rights atrocities going on around us. I’d say we fail on any number of levels. For example, aboriginal families living in dire circumstances in our wealthy, beautiful country of Canada.

Stephanie Gray tries to awaken the apathetic culture to the reality of killing people–human beings. As such, they do postcard drops. If abortion doesn’t kill a person, then doing such a postcard drop is wholly inappropriate. I would not want my nieces to stumble across the graphic photos. But if abortion does kill human beings, then we are perpetrating a major human rights violation. So which is it? Stephanie Gray discusses with Michael Coren.

A discussion between Michael Coren and Professor Ian Gentles about the effects of abortion in a recently released book.

See the infographic below, which can also be found at this link from a pro-choice organization.

At the highest, only eight percent of women don’t use contraceptives for lack of access.

I am glad to see a pro-choice agency putting out information that detracts from their push for access to contraception. Clearly, there are other major reasons why women don’t choose to use it.

I recently read the comments that Joan Chand’oiseau made in response to the sign in Dr. Chantal Barry’s clinic that read: “Please be informed that the physician on duty today will not prescribe the birth control pill,”  in this article.

Then I read some of the comments at the bottom of the page.  Then I wrote this comment:

What is so concerning is the absolutism with which the likes of Joan Chand’oiseau approach the issue. “Dr. Barry’s religion has no place in my health or my reproductive health, period.”

In other words, only Joan Chand’oiseau’s religion of “reproductive rights” should be permitted, and not only permitted, but enforced by the state. And doctors who disagree with Ms. Chand’oiseau’s view of the world should be made to act against their consciences. Doctors should simply be unthinking dispensaries serving the demands of a public who, in Ms. Chand’oiseau’s eyes, could only have her worldview – none other could be possible.

And, there should be no doctors for those Canadians who align themselves with Dr. Chantal Barry’s belief that the BCP is both poor medicine and morally unacceptable.

And then I thought to myself, it’s a scary, scary world.

Expect the unexpected: Heather Mallick’s commentary on C-36 hearings is good.

Childless people often don’t consider a central issue in prostitution: would you want your daughter to do this for a living? If you are blithe about this question, you do not have a teenage daughter who is rebellious or indeed walks along a local prostitution “stroll” on her way to school. I have talked to career brothel managers, to pimps, who got defensive about this. But then some people don’t like their children in the first place, another issue that runs very deep beneath the prostitution story.

I’ve bolded the parts I find most interesting. People who blithely say we should de-criminalize don’t appear to care about where it happens or who does it. And this is the family angle on the whole thing–can we not have communities that at least pretend to think that children are the future?

Doctors must be able to follow their conscience. An article in today’s Post.

That someone was offended because they had to walk a few extra blocks to renew their birth control prescription does not justify the CPSO forcing doctors to contravene their Charter-protected freedom of conscience.

I can never anticipate which news articles will keep me awake at night. Last night, it was this article about Sherri Shepherd.

Sherri already has a nine year old child from a previous marriage. She’s now going through a divorce with her current husband. Due to infertility, she and her husband sought out a donor egg, a surrogate and used his sperm to conceive a child together. The surrogate is still carrying this child.

I think, due to the acrimonious nature of their relationship, Sherri has now decided she wants nothing to do with that child and is seeking a court order to that effect.

I felt sick reading this article and it still disturbed me at 4 am when I was wide awake staring at my ceiling.

Her desires and actions led to the conception of this child. Now she doesn’t want her anymore. And she wants to legally walk away.

All I could think about was that child. How, in a few years, she’ll be able to Google her parents’ names and learn how she wasn’t wanted. In addition, she may or may not ever know her biological mother.

Is anyone thinking about what’s best for this child?

According to the article, Sherri will likely miss the birth of the child as she has arranged to perform at a gospel festival when the baby is likely due.

Great article, as Canada considers C-36, which would essentially implement a Nordic Model on prostitution in Canada.

Europe as a whole is in fact moving towards the Nordic model or even stricter laws. Spain effectively operates a prohibition regime. Earlier this year the European Parliament passed a resolution calling for all European nations to employ Swedish tactics to combat prostitution. In France legislation similar to Bill C-36 is currently before parliament. The United Kingdom already has laws which punish those who purchase sex from forced or underage prostitutes, and a parliamentary group has recommended full-scale implementation of the Nordic model.

In western countries outside of Europe, only the United States is still officially prohibitionist, with the exception of the state of Nevada. Australia and New Zealand have gone further than any country in deregulating the sex trade. But both are struggling with human traffickers, increasing street prostitution, and brothels operating outside the law, prompting a growing debate about how successful legalization has been for those countries.

I just KNEW there was a simple solution here. Rather than curtailing conscience rights, if you want the birth control pill, and your doctor won’t prescribe it, why not… wait for it… go to a different doctor?

If a doctor, based on her experience and research, believes that liberation therapy (dilating and opening blocked neck veins) is not a good option for patients suffering from multiple sclerosis, must she provide that therapy simply because the patient demands it?

What about a doctor who is convinced that anti-cholesterol pills do more harm than good? What if a doctor refuses to prescribe birth control pills because she believes, apart from any religious teaching, that they compromise women’s health? Should this physician disregard her own research, analysis and conclusions and prescribe what she considers to be a dangerous product?

Does it really matter whether the doctor’s belief is characterized as scientific, religious, metaphysical, conscientious, or something else?

Certainly a doctor’s beliefs about what is, or is not, good medicine will sometimes inconvenience a patient. But what would be the consequences of forcing doctors to abandon their professional judgment and violate their conscience in order to pander to patients’ wishes? If the government compels doctors to supply whatever patients demand, this presupposes that a patient’s knowledge, training and judgment is at least equal to that of the doctor’s. And if so, why bother with a medical profession in the first place?

It is absolutely breathtaking to me the speed and ease with which some people pull out the ad hominem attacks:

Those who cannot win an argument often fall back on ad hominem attacks. In the past we could ignore such attacks — indeed, they often worked in our favor. But lately they have taken a dramatic turn for the worse. Those who dissent from the prevailing liberal dogma are quickly branded as extremists and declared to be bad people. Do you support the traditional view of marriage? You’re a homophobe who wants to deny equal rights to gay Americans. Do you question the economic benefits of raising the minimum wage? You are a selfish Scrooge who hates the working class. Do you want America to establish control over its borders? You hate hard-working immigrants who just want to enjoy the American dream. Do you believe a human fetus has legal and natural rights? You are a misogynist who wants to control women’s bodies. …