A Challenge: Canadian Bloggers for Choice

Next Tuesday, Jan. 22, is Blog for Choice Day in the U.S. of A.

The past two years, pro-choice bloggers have come together on January 22nd - the anniversary of Roe v Wade - to write about reproductive health and justice and to keep choice in the national spotlight. And we've been amazingly successful.

So I hope you'll join us again this year for the 35th anniversary of Roe to Blog for Choice. This year, we're asking people to write about why they vote pro-choice.

Great idea. Why not do it here?

January 28th marks the 20th anniversary of R. v. Morgenthaler, the Canadian Supreme Court decision, the one that declared it unconstitutional to force a woman to carry a fetus to term. In Toronto, on Saturday January 26th at 7, there will be a tribute at Ryerson University's Student Centre. Check out the Toronto Social Forum for more info.

Just so you know, the Morgenthaler decision is not a sure thing. It doesn't guarantee that another court can't decide against a woman's right to choose. Emphasis mine:

However, in the US, the Roe decision established "rights" to legal abortion. In Canada, the Morgenthaler decision invalidated a section of Offenses Against the Person and did not outrule the possibility of future anti-abortion legislation.

That means, despite the fact that, for most Canadian women, access to abortion is easier than for U.S. women, that it will stay that way. There are many people here in Canada who want to take away women's reproductive rights.

They write me emails all the time. Two such letters were published in the Star today.

So here's the deal: Why not start a Blog for Choice Day in Canada, on January 28?

I am calling you out --Canadian Cynic, Sooey, Dr. Dawg, POGGE, Galloping Beaver, Scott Tribe, Zorpheus, YaYa, Red Jenny, Unrepentant old Hippie,  StageLeft, Birth Pangs, Hope and Onions, Antigone, WordyLefty and all the rest of ya.

Just do it.

UPPITY DATE (21/1/08): Some people are just keeners. Sooey jumps the blogburst gun:

... Pro-Life political activists do not recognize intent as relevant to the matter of reproductive rights for women. Which means that their logic runs entirely counter to the spirit of the law. Intent matters in our justice system. A lot. Some might argue it's the essential tenet of it.

But to Pro-Lifers, women who have no intent to conceive are as liable for conception as women who do. And liability is the correct term to use in the matter of conception because for women who have no intent to conceive, conception is a liability. Unless it isn't. In which case a woman is quite free to choose to carry on with the pregnancy.

But Pro-Lifers want a State that can demand a woman who had no intent to conceive carry the pregnancy to term - such that she is, in fact, a de facto birth vessel for the State with no rights over her own person simply (or not so simply) because a sperm fertilized one of her ovules.

Sooey no longer accepts comments so I guess I am the one carrying this load here.

Comments

[Dr.Dawg]

Will do. In my calendar.

[JJ]

Right on, AZ. Blogswarm!

[fern hill]

Bread and Roses is on it. http://www.breadnroses.ca/forums/viewtopic.php?t=21733&start=0

How do you do a link here?

[Antonia]

I don't know Fern. I have tried combing Typepad's Help section and nada. Anybody know?

[Prole]

A Creative Revolution reporting for duty!

[MissMay12]

Shameless Magazine is in!

http://shamelessmag.com/blog/2008/01/blog-for-choice-2008/

[April Reign]

You have to go to Comment Formatting and allow HTML

" With Allow limited HTML selected, commenters will be permitted to use HTML in submitted comments; otherwise, HTML will be stripped out.
If you HTML is not allowed in comments, the option to Auto-link URLs will be available. If selected, all URLs submitted in a comment will be transformed into links.
Please note that only selected HTML will be allowed even if you choose this option. This includes basic formatting tags like or , or , , and , , and , , and . Other code, including , is stripped out. This is to protect against harmful or malicious code in comments damaging your page."

Not sure why the above link didn't automatically format

[Antonia]

Okay, I will give that a whack April. Thanks.

[Antonia]

Thanks April, it worked!

[Flashman]

Lovely. Abortion as the highest form of patriotism! Fetusburgers all 'round!

But you need a jingle, something catchy to capture the spirit of it all, with a suitable gluttony-creepy abortion obsession convergence:

Hold the pickles, hold the lettuce
Body parts never upset us
All we want is that you let us
Have it our way
Have it ourrrrr way, have it our waaaaaay!!

[stageleft]

The bunker will have something up AZ, we're probably not as knowledgable on the subject as we should be but I do know that since I'm not a "she" the sensible thing to do is defer to someone who is :-)

[MissMay12]

Flashman: Please revisit the definition of internet trolling. Your baiting is not appropriate given the content of this post.

[Antonia]

MissMay, I am sometimes tempted to delete Flashman's comments but I find them funny in a sick Ann Coulterish he-makes-them-look-bad kind of way. Besides, I am all for freedom of speech, even if i think what you say is asinine.

That said, I admit I have deleted some of JohnnyKap's comments because he flames people. That is totally not acceptable to me. If you can't be amusing without attacking people instead of debating their points, you don't belong here.

This is not some blogs.

If you want to know how it is here in blogoland with the right, check out my friend Dr. Dawg's post here:

http://drdawgsblawg.blogspot.com/2008/01/small-dead-animals-class-act.html

[Marky Mark]

Antonia,

I agree with your comment above. As someone who misbehaved on occasion when commenting on your prior blog, I apologize to you for having done that.

Debate is a good thing. Civil debate can even be pleasant.

[MissMay12]

Fair point, I just get really irritated when someone (clearly a troll) tries to start an argument where there isn't one to start.

I really feel for you with that link, and admire your tenacity - I actually had a read through it yesterday and was shocked and appalled by the relentless hate without real debate. I have been called many things while blogging ("man-hating whore," etc.) and been told to "go back in the kitchen" many times, but nothing as awful (and as vile, violent and asinine) as that.

[Red Jenny]

OK, I've been called out. What can I do but think of something brilliant to say by Jan 22.

[johnnykap]

Antonia, I take umbrage at your characterization of my posts. You censored my post in this thread politely declining your invitation to join the pro-choice (as long as the choice is abortion) blog day. You censored my mere mentioning of the new environmentalist whacko blog at the Star. I have no idea why.

[Dave]

I think we can get in on that one.

[Antonia]

JohnnyKap, you did make those points. True. I allowed them here just now because they were not framed in flaming insults at other commenters. I really can't be bothered editing your comments. Either behave or click! They're gone.

And thanks MarkyMark for your comment over at Stephen Reeves latest blog, born to attack me it would appear, at least judging by the timing.

Here's a post he put up this afternoon but has, I believe, since taken down because I get an error message when I click on the link. I do however have a screen grab, suitable for framing. I believe he refers to you as ''some whiner.'':

http://keltack.typepad.com/dissident_in_toronto/2008/01/why-no-comments.html

''January 20, 2008
Why no comments

Some whiner and admirer of the female entity called Antonia Zerbisias, wondered why no comments allowed. Well the Mutant Monkey called Sooey stopped comments in it's blog, as a few disagreed with it, and it is fairly stupid in its inane ramblings. the Zerbisias entity, had all sorts of distasteful people commenting on her original blog, the Canadian blogosphere has a bunch of (it seems) full time commentators usually of the fascist right and left, who infest blogs, some blog owners ban them, allow them to post but always counter their comments, or just tolerate their views and even agree with them sometimes, or some blog owners don't allow comments, as the comments section is just a means for extremists nuts to vent.

Posted at 04:52 PM | Permalink | TrackBack (0) ''

Incidentally, I can't speak for my friend Sooey but when Stephen Reeves would post comments on her blog, I never thought they raised the tone of the discussion.

I think that his post cited here is evidence of the kind of contribution he makes to the blogosphere, assuming he's a he and his name is Stephen Reeves etc. etc.

[johnnykap]

I do love Mr. Reeves' use of the term "entity". It has a vaguely Star Trekian feel to it. Kind of like the old Crystal Entity. I've started using it in ordinary speech.

Antonia, your characterization of Mr. Reeves is based solely upon the fact that he is a conservative who disagrees with you. It's ok for Sheena to come in and drop the F-bomb because she's one of you.

And I must comment on your consistency. In the post that you just allowed, I included gratuitous cheap shots against both the pro-choice and the environmentalist movements. This was no different than the posts you censored.

[sooey]

I am NOT a mutant monkey. I just have very looooooong arms and ears that sometimes pick up a breeze and get me where I'm going faster.

Or where I'm NOT going faster.

Nevertheless, I'm Pro-choice.

[Antonia]

JK,

Please tell me where Sheena dropped the F-bomb on this blog?
Nah don't bother. She didn't. You are flaming people. It's one thing to knock a movement. But I won't put up with flame wars here.

Note that I am getting tired of spending one second of my life deliberating whether to delete your comments without reading them the way I have been deleting most of your emails without reading them for some 3 or 4 years now.

[stephen.reeves]

Don't women know about birth control??

[johnnykap]

I would like to apologize to the blogging community (it feels nice to belong!!!) and admit an error that I made in my previous post. The entity I was referring to was actually the Crystalline Entity, not the Crystal Entity. I regret the error and will take measures to ensure that it does not happen again.

[Antonia]

Don't women know about birth control??

No. All births are immaculate conceptions and men need not take any responsibility.

[sooey]

There is no point in debating people who are absolute about the sanctity of conception due to a failure to use contraception by a couple of drunken teens who may or may not even like each other having intercourse in the backseat of a car.

[Aurelia]

Antonia,

Slight clarification here, the relevant Supreme Court ruling you may want to read is Daigle v. Tremblay in which the Canadian Supreme Court affirmed that a fetus is not a person, and that only the woman can choose to end a pregnancy, not the biological father or any other party. Morgentaler was an important case, but it was based on the government not having the right to intrude on the doctor patient relationship and privacy rights, making it very much like Roe v. Wade, a mushy ruling that can be overturned.

Daigle v. Tremblay however, was definitive, and is considered to be impossible to overturn short of a constitutional amendment, something quite difficult in this country, as you know!

Another thing, the Assisted Human Reproduction Act was passed by Parliament, and it further defined human embryos, fetuses, sperm and eggs, as "sui generis", neither person nor property under law, but something unique. This was so that we could discuss embryos in a court of law and make regulations about shipping and registration and parentage, without impinging on abortion rights, yet not allowing them to become property for sale.

In short, the law does not consider a fetus to be a person in Canada.

I may blog on the 28th as well. Regardless, I'll be reading what you and the others write. Take care.

[Eugene Plawiuk]

Already began blogging on this in particular the unintended consequences of the Supreme Court decision had in allowing for privatization of health care via the Morgentaler clinics. Many provinces no longer provide abortions in hospitals opting to contract out the service to Morgentaler's clinic. And Morgentaler himself has praised his clinics as an example of a private alternative that is more effective than public services.
See my

Blogging For Choice
http://plawiuk.blogspot.com/2008/01/blogging-for-choice.html

and

Blogging For Choice II
http://plawiuk.blogspot.com/2008/01/blogging-for-choice-ii.html

[Antonia]

You make very valid and original points Eugene. I will be sure to cite them on Monday!