ProWomanProLife

  • The Story
  • The Women
  • Notable Columns
  • Contact Us
You are here: Home / Archives for parliament

Defend Rob Anders

June 27, 2008 by Andrea Mrozek Leave a Comment

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.)

Filed Under: All Posts Tagged With: Amelie Crosson, parliament, Rob Anders

Conscience in politics

March 14, 2008 by Véronique Bergeron Leave a Comment

Reactions from readers and columnists to Ottawa’s Archbishop’s stance on pro-abortion politicians are causing me to pause and reflect on the place of moral principles in a politician’s public life.

Most of all, I am trying to find a way out of saying “I want politicians to follow their conscience when in accordance with mine but not otherwise.” Because let’s be honest with ourselves here: as much as I want pro-life politicians to “vote their conscience,” I would as soon withhold that opportunity to Francine Lalonde and her ilk.

I have to come to terms, somehow, with the inescapable fact that Members of Parliament are voted into office to represent their constituents, not themselves. This is the cornerstone of our system of democratic representation and the only way we can argue, with a straight face, that we all have a hand in the legislative process. Accordingly, there are two ways in which my MP can adequately represent my conscience on Parliament Hill. The first one is for me to elect a candidate whose moral compass more or less matches mine. Failing that, it is also my MP’s duty to make an honest effort at finding out where his or her constituents’ moral views lie. And I am not talking about sending a few emails to trusted supporters.

Either way, the ability to represent one’s constituents in a morally-charged vote demands that moral issues be brought to the forefront of electoral campaigning. In these days of religious, cultural and social pluralism, I want my moral interests represented as well as my political and economic ones.

Where does that leave Catholic politicians who want to be in communion with their church’s teachings while sitting in Parliament? They should be elected as such.

Knowing exactly who and what we are voting for? There’s an idea.

Filed Under: All Posts Tagged With: conscience, democracy, freedom, legislative process, parliament, Politics, vote

Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrssby feather

Notable Columns

  • A pro-woman budget wouldn't tell me how to live my life
  • Bad medicine
  • Birth control pills have side effects
  • Canada Summer Jobs debacle–Can Trudeau call abortion a right?
  • Celebrate these Jubilee jailbirds
  • China has laws against sex selection. But not Canada. Why?
  • Family love is not a contract
  • Freedom to discuss the “choice”
  • Gender quotas don't help business or women
  • Ghomeshi case a wake-up call
  • Hidden cost of choice
  • Life at the heart of the matter
  • Life issues and the media
  • Need for rational abortion debate
  • New face of the abortion debate
  • People vs. kidneys
  • PET-P press release
  • Pro-life work is making me sick
  • Prolife doesn't mean anti-woman
  • Settle down or "lean in"
  • Sex education is all about values
  • Thank you, Camille Paglia
  • The new face of feminism
  • Today’s law worth discussing
  • When debate is shut down in Canada’s highest places
  • Whither feminism?

Categories

  • All Posts
  • Assisted Suicide/Euthanasia
  • Charitable
  • Ethics
  • Featured Media
  • Featured Posts
  • Feminism
  • Free Expression
  • International
  • Motherhood
  • Other
  • Political
  • Pregnancy Care Centres
  • Reproductive Technologies

All Posts

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

Copyright © 2025 · News Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in