Low blows

Via my friends over at Bread and Roses, we bounce over to Montreal's Le Devoir which reports:

La nomination d'Henry Morgentaler à l'Ordre du Canada ne sera pas le seul événement à raviver les tensions entre les pro-vie et les pro-choix au sein du Parti conservateur (PC) fédéral. Les militants conservateurs vont également croiser le fer sur la question de l'avortement lors du prochain congrès d'orientation de la formation politique, qui aura lieu en novembre, à Winnipeg, a appris Le Devoir. À cette occasion, les militants du Québec combattront une proposition qui émane de quelques circonscriptions de l'Ouest du pays et qui vise à donner un statut juridique au foetus.

My translation, with links:

The appointment of Dr. Henry Morgentaler to the Order of Canada won't be the only thing to resurrect tensions between the pro-life and pro-choice factions of the federal Conservatives. Le Devoir has learned that party members will be crossing swords over the abortion issue during party platform discussions to be held at the policy convention in Winnipeg next November. There, Quebec members will fight a proposal coming out of certain factions in Western Canada who want to confer legal personhood on the fetus.

Heh-heh. Go ahead. Make my day.

Not only would that cement your image as being anti-woman, but it would also seal your government's fate during the next election.

Consider two polls, both reported today, both showing that most Canadians approve of Morgentaler's recognition with an Order of Canada. The first, in today's Star. The second, in the National Post, which has been publishing the most virulent anti-Morgentaler and anti-choice screeds since Canada Day.

If abortion comes up in Winnipeg, the debate will be blown wide open -- and Canadians will learn just how much many Conservatives want to keep women chained to the nursery, stove and bed.

Think I am kidding? The party is supported by people who want to jail women who get abortions.

Mary Ellen Douglas, National Organizer, Campaign Life Coalition: Our society has denied justice for unborn children who are killed daily in their mothers’ wombs at the request of the mother. We need to correct this and return that protection to the unborn. It then follows that jail time for those who commit the crime of abortion is not only just, but absolutely necessary.

Natalie Hudson, Executive director, Right to Life Association of Toronto and Area: There is no easy answer to the question of what the penalty ought to be for a woman who has an abortion. There is no question that the act of abortion takes the life of an unborn child and should be judged as criminal, but the psychological state of a woman who chooses to undergo this procedure should factor into a criminal charge.

Peter Ryan, Executive director, New Brunswick Right to Life Association: The main ones to be held accountable by the law should be those who commit abortions, those who assist at the procedures and those who promote abortions. But women who undergo abortions should also be held accountable for taking a human life. Here, the law should perhaps resemble its present provisions for infanticide, which take account of the oft-present element of emotional duress.

Etc.

As I wrote today in my treeware column, in discussing the various bills now before Parliament which threaten women's reproductive rights:

(T)here are at least four federal bills, all introduced by men (not surprising since Parliament is overwhelmingly male) that aim below women's belts.

In all the fuss these past few days over Morgentaler's long overdue honour, there has been almost no mention of these bills, as if, even taken together, they pose little threat to a woman's right to terminate her pregnancy – or even to obtain contraception.

Instead, the "debate" has focused on Morgentaler himself who, despite his pioneering for women's health, is really beside the point.

That doesn't diminish his courageous fight, which put his life in danger and his butt in jail, and resulted in that 1988 Supreme Court decision which declared the abortion section of the Criminal Code unconstitutional.

The thing is that, since then, no law has regulated abortion in Canada.

But it's not for lack of trying. Between 2003 and 2005 alone, Conservative MPs introduced no fewer than seven anti-choice bills.

It's no wonder, then, that during the 2004 federal election, party leader Stephen Harper was forced to muzzle his pro-life members while reassuring voters that his government had no plans to reopen the abortion debate.

Well, in a way it hasn't.

That's because two Conservative private member's bills pretend not to be about abortion at all.

Ken Epp's Bill C-484 is, on the surface, about protecting the rights of "unborn victims" from violence.

When he introduced it last December, the vehemently anti-abortion Epp declared he had "been waiting for this moment for over 14 years."

To date, more than a dozen religious and pro-choice groups have come out in support of this bill. Standing against it is a long list of legal, medical, academic and feminist organizations which see C-484 for what it truly is, a back door to sending women back to back alleys.

But it's not the only bill on the legislative table with the potential to restrict women's reproductive options.

In April, Conservative MP Maurice Vellacott put forward Bill C-537, An Act to Amend the Criminal Code (protection of conscience rights in the health care profession).

Again, at first glance, it looks fine. No health professionals would be required to administer any treatment that violates their moral or religious beliefs.

But, as Vellacott said straight out when he introduced it, "The bill seeks to ensure that health care providers will never be forced to participate against their will in procedures such as abortions ..."

So, let's say that, there's a terrible accident and the medical team must choose between saving the life of a pregnant woman or her fetus? Or what if a teen needs the morning-after pill and the only pharmacist in town won't dispense it?

It's not surprising that the most vocal opposition to these bills (and one of the others I report on) is coming out of Quebec. That's because, unlike in the most of Canada, there is still a very powerful -- and organized -- feminist movement there. (Another reason may be that Quebecers, once they threw off the shackles of the repressive Church, have never looked back.) That's why so many Quebec-based unions, medical and legal associations and even the National Assembly have opposed Bill C-484 as well as the other proposed legislation.

If only it were so in the English-speaking provinces where the media have all been ignoring these bills.

This doesn't mean you should.

Do something.

Comments

[Tim Tubbs]

For my own information......at what time of term does a fetus become a person/child/human being????Has there ever been a length of term set by either the medical profession or a court of law?
If so,does it coincide with the term of time for an abortion?Is there a time when it ceases to be an abortion and becomes a homicide?

[Antonia]

There have been several pertinent legal decisions.
Some of them are reviewed here:
http://www.arcc-cdac.ca/fetal_homicide_law.html
Personhood is also defined in the Criminal Code:

When child becomes human being

223. (1) A child becomes a human being within the meaning of this Act when it has completely proceeded, in a living state, from the body of its mother, whether or not

(a) it has breathed;

(b) it has an independent circulation; or

(c) the navel string is severed.

Killing child
(2) A person commits homicide when he causes injury to a child before or during its birth as a result of which the child dies after becoming a human being.

R.S., c. C-34, s. 206.

[ian]

inside: dispensible wad of flesh; outside: human being with full rights as an individual.

something seriously wrong with this law.

[deBeauxOs]

Tim Tubbs said: "For my own information......at what time of term does a fetus become a person/child/human being????"

For my own information, why are you asking, Tim? Are you planning to become pregnant? (Or perhaps I should ask first if you have the required physiological life-giving equipment.)

Is a woman close to you (spouse, sister, daughter) pregnant, and struggling with a medical condition that threatens her own life?

As a woman who gave birth to a daughter almost 33 years ago, my (intended and wanted) pregnancy was an evolving life-giving event that progressed over 40 weeks, was punctuated by labour and produced a distinct and separate human being at that point.

[...pat.]

Oh, I am so disappointed in most politicians that they are not protesting these gruesome proposals. I wish the NDP were more vocal, and that the press would report things like Jack Layton's comments about Morgentaler as much as they report a small group of Roman Catholics who are giving back the medal given to the now-dead founder.

I am p155ed off because the Conservative government has removed funding from feminist organizations, resulting in the diminishing of our voices, abilities to challenge laws, and rights to fight for true equality.

I am really glad that the same has not happened in Quebec, which is now a beacon shining light on these injustices.

We need to rekindle the flame elsewhere; we must have a coalition of the different women's groups to be heard.

We need to fund it ourselves, because the funding is not likely to come from either the federal or provincial levels. Not in Ontario; not in the Atlantic provinces; certainly not in the Western provinces.

[The Stygian and his Shemitish Dogs]

"Killing child
(2) A person commits homicide when he causes injury to a child before or during its birth as a result of which the child dies after becoming a human being."

so what happens when the aborted fetus survives outside the mother?- as is recorded far too often - I used to be mildly pro-abortion, but cases like that changed my mind - are the medical personnel involved guilty of homicide? maybe we just need good lawyers to read the law as it stands.

and is "BeauxOs" meant to be read phonetically?

[sooey]

Ontario Premier, Dalton McGuinty, can be surprising, I must say, and good on 'im:

"I know that Dr. Morgentaler's been seen as a controversial figure, but I believe in a woman's right to make a very difficult decision," McGuinty said.

"And if she makes that difficult decision and chooses to have an abortion, I want her to be able to do that in a way that's safe, in a way that's publicly funded. So I know it's divisive, but I think it's important."

We should ignore the pro-lifers (they argue in bad faith - read what they say regarding ANY issue involving women's human rights) and focus on ACCESS to abortion services.

[Big Dave]

Yeah.... phonetic BeauxOs seems appropriate...

My personal feeling is that what happens inside a mother's body until birth is her business. How stupid will this issue get? Will mothers be charged with child neglect if the baby is stillborn? Or maybe criminal neglect because they failed to take heroic measures to ensure a live birth. Sheesh... I'm glad I'm not a woman. Women need to kick ass and smarten up the Bozos (ooops... sorry) in government.

[deBeauxOs]

The Stygian and his Shemitish Dogs said: "...I used to be mildly pro-abortion, but cases like that changed my mind ..."

So looking at no-choice propaganda changed your mind? Perhaps you could read this blog post and learn something else about the reality of pregnancy, as experienced by some women who wanted to be pregnant, but then found out that going full term could kill them or the fetus.

http://www.hotflashreport.com/story/2008/7/6/11737/20141

And then of course, do read about US doctors who can't provide health care to a patient pregnant with a fetus that has stopped developing, but is "allowed" to putrify inside her uterus until she miscarries because her Ob/Gyn is afraid of being charged with a crime.

[fern hill]

Antonia, your readers might like to sign the petition in support of the OC for Dr. Morgentaler.

http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/dr-morgentaler-to-receive-order-of-canada.html

[Amy]

Hello,

My comment will probably never make it up on your website, but I thought that I would write anyways. I was just wondering if you have ever taken the time to research what the facts are after a woman does have an abortion? If not it might be a good idea! The reports of most women seem to elude to the fact that an abortion is more harmful than helpful!

As well I am not sure if you were aware but in a poll done by the Globe and Mail 60% of Canadians opposed Morgentaler recieving the Order of Canada. Also as of today 4 people have returned there Order's of Canada, because they do not want to be in the same category as Morgentaler!

Just wondering why none of those statistics are on your blog!

I hope that you have a good day!
Bless you

Amy

[Antonia]

Thanks for your comment Amy.

1. The reports of most women seem to elude to the fact that an abortion is more harmful than helpful!

ANSWER: Since it's estimated that as many as 40% of women have had an abortion -- and certainly about 100,000 (more or less) are performed every year -- there is no evidence that such vast numbers of women are walking around with ''harmful'' effects. Do some women suffer ''harmful'' effects? No doubt. But hundreds of thousands, even millions? Highly doubtful.

2. As well I am not sure if you were aware but in a poll done by the Globe and Mail 60% of Canadians opposed Morgentaler recieving the Order of Canada.

ANSWER: That poll was an online poll which is not scientific and could easily be influenced by an organized campaign, perhaps like this one: http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/jul/08070201.html
The two polls I cite above were scientifically conducted.

3. Also as of today 4 people have returned there Order's of Canada, because they do not want to be in the same category as Morgentaler!

ANSWER: First of all, hundreds of members have NOT returned their Orders of Canada. Second, at least one person has talked about returning theirs but has yet to deliver. Third, at least one was returned by somebody who did not win it, but on behalf of somebody who is dead.
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=638602

Thanks for your comment.

[fern hill]

Dr. Dawg recently took all the lies told about abortion and thoroughly kicked them around several blocks. Pro-choice people should bookmark this for the Amys of the world: http://drdawgsblawg.blogspot.com/2008/07/anti-choice-expertise.html

[Scott Tribe]

I'm slightly off-topic Antonia, so feel free to remove this if you wish, but I note that since you folks here at the Star started up the blog section, and then proceeded to allow user commentary on your news stories and editorials online, there's been an influx of opinion from folks who I bet would normally never even lift a finger to buy or read the Star.

I'm not saying that the Star shouldn't have - I think its great you're allowing feedback. I just sometimes feel like I'm reading a compressed version of what the G & M gets in its commentary sections online. These folks are very organized to leave stuff en masse on here to make it appear that the paper's views are out of whack with the populace's views. We call that "freeping".

Ok.. so after saying all that and attempting to stay slightly on topic, that's why, Amy, you take what the "online" poll at the G & M says with a grain of salt. It's the scientific polls like what Antonia mentioned that are the real indicators of public opinion. Quite frankly, with all the conservative trollers over at the G & M, I'm mildly surprised that the online #'s over there opposing Dr. Morgentaler weren't higher.

[sooey]

Did the media poll Cardinal Carter's nomination for opposition? Of course not. And yet, this lady wasn't at all pleased:

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-108693715.html

[Imethisguy]

"coming out of certain factions in Western Canada"

'Toronto and area' 'New Brunswick' 'National'
Doesn't sound all that 'western' or 'de l'Ouest du pays' to me. There may even be a few people like that in Quebec. Non?