You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Pro-Choice’ tag.
Whoops, not Canadian, no reproductive rights for you!
The Conservative government of Canada once again proves that it is anti-choice, anti-rational and anti-woman. The CBC said:
“A Liberal motion to include a broader range of family planning programs, including contraception, in a maternal health initiative for developing countries, was defeated 144-138 in the House of Commons Tuesday.”
A Liberal motion in the house of commons that was based on fact and evidence in the field was voted down.
“The motion tabled by Liberal foreign affairs critic Bob Rae said Canada’s maternal health proposal to G8 nations must be based on “scientific evidence, which proves that education and family planning can prevent as many as one in every three maternal deaths” and refrain from the “failed right-wing ideologies” of former U.S. president George W. Bush.”
Shocking as it may seem to the CPC, access to reproductive services saves lives.
“Earlier in the day, Rae said the government has refused to acknowledge scientific evidence that shows reducing deaths of women during childbirth in developing countries is inextricably linked to the availability of family planning”
So rather than own up to their anti-woman, anti-science platform the Conservatives decide this is an attempt to reopen the abortion debate? How the frack does this make sense? The question of Abortion in Canada has been settled legally (Access to facilities though is another story). Women have the legal right to access abortions and other health services when they deem fit. Nothing to debate. What minister Oda says is just a sad attempt to cover the Canadian government’s twisted socially conservative roots.
Denying Women Rights World Wide - A compassionate conservative.
“Oda described the Liberal motion as a “transparent attempt to reopen the abortion debate that we have clearly said we have no intention to getting into.”
She insisted the government understands the urgency of ensuring that women can have a safe, healthy pregnancy, and she cited statistics suggesting that as many as 80 per cent of deaths during childbirth are easily preventable by providing basic needs such as clean water and access to trained health-care workers.”
Just be open with us Bev, the freedoms Canadian women have should not apply to women of other countries, after-all it is God given right for a woman to die in childbirth.
Canada, despite being currently ‘governed’ by a conservative minority government is still a pretty good place to be. The important date that I refer to in is January 28th, 1988. It was when the Supreme Court of Canada made this landmark ruling on abortion in Canada.
Jan. 28, 1988: The Supreme Court of Canada strikes down Canada’s abortion law as unconstitutional. The law is found to violate Section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms because it infringes upon a woman’s right to “life, liberty and security of person.” Chief Justice Brian Dickson writes: “Forcing a woman, by threat of criminal sanction, to carry a fetus to term unless she meets certain criteria unrelated to her own priorities and aspirations, is a profound interference with a woman’s body and thus a violation of her security of the person.” Canada becomes one of a small number of countries without a law restricting abortion. Abortion is now treated like any other medical procedure and is governed by provincial and medical regulations.
One of the few times that I’ve actually felt some national pride for Canada. Canada in this one instance lives up to it ‘reputation’ for being a caring progressive nation.
I shudder at the kludge of access and availability of reproductive services in the United States. It is certainly not perfect in Canada, as access is not %100 in all provinces, but at least we have the notion that women are autonomous beings codified in law and can use the law to further access to reproductive services across all of Canada.
I’m constantly updated on how far the rabbit hole goes when it comes to anti-woman vitriol and hate. Of course it is cloaked in the odious trappings of religion, why not?
It is nice we have people like Ms.Rose around, to show how religion can really stunt your intellectual and moral development as a human being. I am beginning to worry that I will wear out the ‘fail’ tag if this level of crazy continues.
H/T to JJ over at Unrepentant Old Hippie for introducing me to the lovely Ms.Rose.
I am surprised how often comes up in the blogsphere. What I am also surprised at is the inconsistency of the anti-choice position when it comes to war and capital punishment. The fetus fetishists fall over themselves decrying the evils of abortion and how women must be prevented from exercising their rights to bodily autonomy while all the while the politicians they support go to war, enact egregious foreign policy and support predatory capitalism/globalism.
How about this? Let’s not go to war and kill thousands of innocent people for the lofty notions of ‘fighting terrorism’ or ‘energy security'(those damn arabs having the nerve to live on top of *our* oil. Or, let us donate the full .07 of our GNP so the thousands of children that die every day from lack of clean water/starvation can be saved. Or the thousands of children who die from malaria that could be saved by inexpensive mosquito netting?
Nah.
That would conflict with the accepted foreign policy goals. Debate on those topics is verboten. What is on the table though saving lives via denuding women of their bodily autonomy and reproductive freedom. We can debate that until the cows come home.
Utter horse-pucky.
Twisty, from the blog I Blame the Patriarchy opines on the recent passage of the healthcare bill in the US with the Stupack amendment:
“What I’m getting at is this: my lack of surprise at this Stupak shit proceeds from irrefutable evidence that state ownership of women is among the most beloved of our violent culture’s violent traditions. Social conservatives appear to believe that God made patriarchy in his own image, and that he will withdraw his complimentary concierge services and cancel Christmas, NASCAR, and life everlasting if the state stops oppressing women for even one second. So-called progressives just want uninterrupted access to pussy.”
I lack the the colourful verbiage that Twisty uses, but in this quote she deftly describes the atrocious nature of this particular amendment.
Abortion is not a crime in Canada. Abortion is under siege by anti-choice zealots, par for the course, but a good portion Canadian women have access to reproductive health services.
A woman’s right to make reproductive decisions is foundational in women being recognized as autonomous beings. It is paramount that we keep abortion, safe, legal, and accessible in Canada.
As far as I am concerned the Stupak Amendment is one compromise too far.
I keep wondering why certain things are not just pushed through the legislative process in the US. George Bush was excellent and getting his boneheaded policy through congress and the senate.
As Jill from Feministe says: Katha Pollitt hits it out of the park. An excerpt from her article :
You know what I don’t want to hear right now about the Stupak-Pitts amendment banning abortion coverage from federally subsidized health insurance policies? That it’s the price of reform, and prochoice women should shut up and take one for the team. “If you want to rebuild the American welfare state,” Peter Beinart writes in the Daily Beast, “there is no alternative” than for Democrats to abandon “cultural” issues like gender and racial equality. Hey, Peter, Representative Stupak and your sixty-four Democratic supporters, Jim Wallis and other antichoice “progressive” Christians, men: why don’t you take one for the team for a change and see how you like it?
For example, budget hawks in Congress say they’ll vote against the bill because it’s too expensive. Maybe you could win them over if you volunteered to cut out funding for male-exclusive stuff, like prostate cancer, Viagra, male infertility, vasectomies, growth-hormone shots for short little boys, long-term care for macho guys who won’t wear motorcycle helmets and, I dunno, psychotherapy for pedophile priests. Men could always pay in advance for an insurance policy rider, as women are blithely told they can do if Stupak becomes part of the final bill.
President Obama, too, worries about the deficit. Maybe you could help him out by sacrificing your denomination’s tax exemption. The Catholic Church would be a good place to start, and it wouldn’t even be unfair, since the blatant politicking of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops on abortion violates the spirit of the ban on electoral meddling by tax-exempt religious institutions. Why should antichoicers be the only people who get to refuse to let their taxes support something they dislike? You don’t want your tax dollars to pay, even in the most notional way, for women’s abortion care, a legal medical procedure that one in three American women will have in her lifetime? I don’t want to pay for your misogynist fairy tales and sour-old-man hierarchies.
Great article. I just hope that Stupak-Pitts is a stillborn amendment. Women must not take another hit because of the radical christian rights inroads into politics.
Sometimes here at DWR headquarters I get a little discouraged by all the people whose beliefs are so horribly vapidly wrong about the reproductive issues women face.
ENTER THE UN: with little snippets such as :
- All women have access to contraception to avoid unintended pregnancies
- All pregnant women have access to skilled care at the time of birth
- All those with complications have timely access to quality emergency obstetric care.
Wow, people working to actually help women, instead of stripping them of their rights.
bleatmop
Mystro
Dead Wild Roses 
Your opinions…