Canadians have the right to weigh in
Conservative MP Rod Bruinooge already knows how he wants to kick off the new year, and the new decade.
He has puiblicly stated he wants to re-open the abortion debate in Canada.
“I was born in the post-Morgentaler era, and I think I come to this debate under a different context,” says Bruinooge. “I believe that having open debate on important topics like this is essential for any democratic movement. It's a democracy, and we are putting our ideas out for debate.”
“I'm under no illusions that this is going to be an easy course,” he continues. “There are some parties that suppress pro-life thinking. There could be consequences for those MPs in other parties. I know there have been some political parties that have chosen to remove their members for having a certain philosophical viewpoint.”
“The bottom line is that people like myself are not going to stop until, at the very least, unborn children have more value than a Canadian kidney,” Bruinooge concludes. “Your kidneys have more protection than an unborn child until the moment it is out of the woman. I challenge anyone to debate me on that point, because I don't think you can. It is very true. There is no legal value to an unborn child in Canada. I just don't see that as a good bioethical position for anyone to have, let alone a country.”
For their own part, Canada's pro-abortion lobby doesn't want a debate on abortion. Joyce Arthur, the national coordinator for the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada, insists that the majority of the Conservative Party caucus is "publicly anti-choice" (a common epithet the pro-abortion movement uses against their opponents), and insists that Canadians don't want to debate abortion.
“It's something that the Conservative Party is out of touch with, because Canadians don't want to go back to the abortion debate,” Arthur insists. “People are happy with the status quo. It's working well.”
But Arthur shouldn't be nearly so fast to speak for all Canadians. In a 2008 poll, 49% of Canadians wanted abortion to remain legal "under any circumstances". Comparatively, 42% of Canadians wanted abortion to remain legal, but "only under certain circumstances", and 5% wanted abortion to be illegal under all circumstances.
In other words, Canadian society is far from united behind the status quo. Rather, Canadians are divided over this issue, and as is the case in any democracy, are entitled the opportunity to debate the issue, both inside and outside of Parliament.
Why Joyce Arthur and her pro-abortion compatriots are so afraid to debate the issue is a matter they'll have to resolve themselves.
Thursday, December 31, 2009
3 comments:
Post your comments, and join the discussion!
Be aware that spam posts and purile nonsense will not be tolerated, although purility within constructive commentary is encouraged.
All comments made by Kevron are deleted without being read. Also, if you begin your comment by saying "I know you'll just delete this", it will be deleted. Guaranteed. So don't be a dumbass.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I am Conservative on a lot of issues, but my mom is fiercely pro choice. I was the 4th of her 4 children, and I am still alive. My mother went that far because she wanted a son and her first 3 were daughters. As soon as I was born, her tubes were tied. I strongly support abortion for rape victims, and if you make rape a precondition to an abortion you create a moral hazard. I say once the fetus is as big as a G.I Joe, you can't kill it. I rest my case at that.
ReplyDeleteEven though I concede that an abortion is murder at a specific stage of the pregnancy, I can never jump on the Pro-Life bandwagon. As a Scottish Protestant, I tend to be skeptical of what Catholics tell me to think. That a segment of the right loudly supports Palin because she did not abort the down syndrome baby and young Juno Palin birthed Levi's seed, well I don't feel good about it.
But I am a proud right winger, so am I disqualified from having an opinion?
I'm always happy when people want to debate fetal rights.
ReplyDeleteBut what I'm confused about is that you're highlighting an article from last year.
Some of the comments in the Globe and Mail article are dated yesterday and today.
Am I missing something?
Heh. That's evidently my mistake.
ReplyDeleteGoogle News sometimes sends me old stories. Usually I can identify them fairly quickly, but this one in particular escaped my notice.
It's my error, although i stand by the sentiments of the post.