Not that we're having an abortion debate or anything ...
Here's a clip:
Canada still has no abortion law; it’s the only developed country in the world without one. A 2008 Toronto Star/Angus Reid survey found that the majority of Canadians are pro-choice: 45 percent felt that abortion should be permitted in all cases and 22 percent felt it should be permitted, but subject to greater restrictions. Meanwhile, 18 percent felt it should be allowed only in cases of rape or incest or to save a woman’s life. Perhaps not surprisingly, then, 60 percent of Canadians supported the appointment of Morgentaler as a member of the Order of Canada.
But if you ask the women who came of age after abortion was decriminalized, the debate is far from being resolved, and abortion has not lost its stigma. Young pro-choice activists still see a need to affirm abortion rights, particularly safe access, as part of an entire slate of sexual freedoms. Their pro-life counterparts want the feminist movement to broaden itself to encompass their beliefs. What it adds up to is a generational change – some of it subtle, some of it definitely not – on both sides of the debate. This is not their mothers’ movement anymore.
But later Dunphy goes a little astray when she talks about ProWomanProLife’s 33-year-old founder, Andrea Mrozek. (Boldface is mine.)
Mrozek, a writer and communications manager based in Ottawa, often spices up her blog postings with an appealing mix of easy, sometimes sassy humour and overt feminism.
“Women can be powerful and do whatever they want,” she says. “But abortion is not part of that.” Mrozek isn’t interested in lobbying politicians to recriminalize abortion. She’d rather change minds through debate and conversation, and increase financial and social support for pregnant women so that they will not decide to abort. “Not because there’s a law telling them what to do.”
First of all, her blog is much more than ''pro-life.'' It is a totally pro-Conservative website.
Which is fair enough since this is a totally anti-Conservative blog.
Here's the thing, what Dunphy neglects to mention is where Mrozek is a communications -- and research -- manager.
Family is the foundation of our society. The health of our children, communities and nation depends on strong families. The aim of society and government policy should be to protect and support this foundation.
The Institute of Marriage and Family Canada (IMFC) conducts, compiles and presents the latest and most accurate research to ensure that marriage and family-friendly policy are foremost in the minds of Canada’s decision makers.
Is that code for lobbying? The very C/conservative IMFC is, according to the award-winning journalist Marci McDonald in a must-read piece in The Walrus, headed by David Quist. (I added the link and boldface.)
Is that code for lobbying?
The very C/conservative IMFC is, according to the award-winning journalist Marci McDonald in a must-read piece in The Walrus, headed by David Quist. (I added the link and boldface.)
Last February, before Parliament had convened, the imfc’s gala launch lured more than a dozen MPs, including Stockwell Day, Harper’s new minister of public security, and Jason Kenney, who delivered a toast. It also drew protesters from the equal-marriage lobby group Egale, who denounced Dobson, a child psychologist whose Colorado Springs broadcasting empire turned him into one of the chief power brokers of the new US religious right, which put George W. Bush into the White House.
In a city where the Evangelical Fellowship had been a lone voice for the last decade, Quist’s institute is the latest and most lavishly funded of a new crop of faith-based organizations that have sprung up in the capital over the last eighteen months. Most, like the Institute for Canadian Values founded by Charles McVety, were a direct riposte to Bill C-38, which legalized same-sex marriage. “There’s no doubt it was a major lightning rod for a lot of people,” Quist says. “There was an awakening. People said, ‘Wow, how did we get here? And is it too late? Is it all set in stone?’”
Quist paints the institute merely as a vehicle to provide lawmakers with helpful information to better argue their case, whether on spanking—the subject of Dobson’s 1970 bestseller Dare to Discipline—or assisted suicide, which social conservatives see as the next major front in the culture wars. His inspiration, he claims, is not Dobson’s controversial Washington arm, the Family Research Council, whose president told a Washington gathering of conservatives last year that the federal judiciary posed a greater threat to democracy than terrorist groups. Instead, for a role model Quist looked to that provocative bastion of economic conservatism, Vancouver’s Fraser Institute. “When they started twenty-five years ago, they were viewed with great skepticism,” he points out. “Now they’re quoted all the time.”
Despite the institute’s research mission, Reid wanted a seasoned political player in the pilot’s seat. A born-again Christian who spent six years as executive assistant to Reed Elley, the Reform/Alliance MP from Nanaimo-Cowichan, Quist more than fit the job description. In 2004, when Elley resigned, Quist ran for his seat and, after losing, spent last year as operations manager in Harper’s office. That resumé might seem more essential to a lobbyist than a think-tank chief, but Quist had learned how to draft cram notes for MPs and their aides. “I knew if we could make the research into bite-sized chunks—clearly written with five or six bullets or talking points—it would be invaluable,” he says. “No twenty-page report is going to get read.”
(Quist, by the way, once mistakenly copied me on an email about me he intended for his staff. I still have it. Hee. Hee.)
So Mrozek is definitely ''not interested in lobbying,'' despite how she writes op-eds in the IMFC's name claiming that the Pill causes breast cancer and other nonsense?
Anyway, back to Dunphy's story:
Along with five other young professional women from across the country, Mrozek launched the (ProWomanProLife) website in January 2008. “I looked at the Canadian landscape and noticed there was no [pro-life] voice focusing on women’s rights,” she says. “There was no one representing my point of view in the public square.” So she worked up her courage to send out some emails to women she thought – but wasn’t sure – might be on the same page.
So I guess we are to assume that the IMFC has no connection with the site, or its creation?
I'm not saying it does. I'm saying it doesn't pass the smell test, and I thought Dunphy had a better nose than that.
I just wish she had asked.