Last week on the year end review on
CFRA, Steve Madely spoke about how when the Morgentaler decision came
down in 1988, the Supreme Court Justices said that Parliament needed
to enact a new law on abortion. He noted that Parliament never did do
that. Steve went on to say that more recently, the Supreme Court
judges ruled that Parliament needed to enact a prostitution Law, and
they did do that recently.
The difference in the latter case of course, is that the SCJs gave Parliament a one year time limit to create a prostitution law. Parliament did this. But the SCJs did not impose a time limit in the 1988 ruling and no new law has ever been enacted in Canada. Every attempt to rectify this lack of a formal abortion law has failed, mostly thanks to political cowardice.
This makes the pro-abortions happy.
The difference in the latter case of course, is that the SCJs gave Parliament a one year time limit to create a prostitution law. Parliament did this. But the SCJs did not impose a time limit in the 1988 ruling and no new law has ever been enacted in Canada. Every attempt to rectify this lack of a formal abortion law has failed, mostly thanks to political cowardice.
This makes the pro-abortions happy.
Today John Robson slipped into an
on-air conversation that wasn't about abortion, how women want the
right to do what they want with their body, except that the fetus is
not her body. (The worn-out illogical argument about a "woman's
right to do what she wants with her body" never ceases to amaze
me.)
So what's my point exactly? It's just
that it is so lovely to hear a radio personality actually willingly
bring up abortion in this way. Because it hardly ever happens.
I remember years ago arguing with
someone who knew a whole lot more than I did about media bias about
abortion. When they told me that the media was biased, I relied, of
course they aren't biased. I thought the person was just being overly
dramatic and paranoid. Surely they are balanced, I said. Right? It took me a while but I
finally realized I was very naive.
That was then. Now I see the media bias
towards the pro-abortion worldview, and expect it at all turns, where
"pro-choice" is "progressive". The "pro-choice"
worldview believes it's just the way it is if you care about women,
which ironically, is so opposite to reality.
That's why it always startles me when a
media person actually says something on air that either raises the
topic in a neutral but probing way (like Steve did) or actually puts
forth a pro-life worldview (like John did).
I know that it's up to us pro-lifers to
keep on doing what we are doing to change the conversation, since we
can't expect the mainstream media to help. So every tidbit we get
from the media is a small step in the right direction and we have to
take what we can get. For this, I am thankful.
Sadly, it only seems to be Sun News people who are willing to offer a pro-life view. I think there are a couple who speak up at National Post, but that's it in Canada. It always puzzles me why it is so easy to speak on abortion in the US, but in Canada it is the issue to be avoided.
ReplyDelete