Media writes that conservative Christians have filed a complaint against Supreme Court Justice Beverley McLachlin for her role in getting Morgentaler into the Order of Canada–when abortion is a matter that may yet come before the courts.
First off, a bronze medal to the mainstream media for doing no research and for exhibiting a bias in the opening line of the report. It’s good to know that some things never change, like death and taxes. Life rolls on at a quick quip and I personally, as a small-c conservative, like to know that some traditions are constant, nay, immutable, like the rocks of Easter Island, and as receptive to change and new ideas, too. (A gold would have been achieved by ignoring the story all told. I suppose in that sense, the MSM fell behind their usual high standards.)
As a small aside, last I checked, Physicians for Life is not a conservative, Christian group. But no matter. Let’s say it is exclusively conservative Christians who are concerned about Justice McLachlin being intimately involved. If that is the case, I have one question: Why aren’t more people concerned? Tis merely a matter of justice and equality in our court system, I suppose. Booooooorrrrrring.
________________________
Tanya adds: Let me get this straight, then. Using the term ‘Christian’ here doesn’t make the article more eye-catching, and it doesn’t make it more accurate. So what does it do?
It again marginalizes pro-lifers to some off-shore religious sub-culture. Don’t tell me the media doesn’t have a political agenda. (Perish the thought!)
By the way, what are all these “Christians” getting so wound up about?
The conduct of Advisory Council Chair, Chief Justice McLachlin, throughout the process of awarding Dr. Henry Morgentaler the Order of Canada demonstrates bias, political agenda and a wanton disregard for the Constitution of the Order of Canada and time honoured regulations,” said the letter.
“The complaint letter alleges Morgentaler should have been disqualified from the award under its constitution because he had been “subject to official sanction” when his medical licence was revoked for one year in 1976, his nomination had been rejected twice before by previous advisory councils and because at least two council members dissented on his selection.”
by 
Leave a Reply