Mike Schouten wrote in the National Post on May 25 that many voters see abortion as a social justice issue, and that Mr. Harper may be paying the price for shutting down the abortion debate.
Mr. Schouten says:
"The Prime Minister believes that an abortion debate would hurt his party in the polls. I submit the opposite: Paradoxically, the recent drop in support for Harper’s party may have something to do from his refusal to act as a principled social-justice champion on an issue that many of his (former) supporters care about."
Then a letter writer responded with this:
"I also support Stephen Harper's decision to not open the abortion debate. I believe that women must continue to have the right to choose abortion should this be compatible with their life situations...proabortion persons equally must have the opportunity to live according to their belief system. All Canadians deserve the opportunity to make their choices about abortion and the Prime Minister is correct in not opening up this divisive issue."
To which I responded with this letter. Below is the full text of that letter to the editor:
The letter writer "believe[s] that women must continue to have the right to choose abortion should this be compatible with their life situations". Let's say that I have just decided that my "life situation" includes my choice to murder someone. Would he support that? He might argue that murder is not legal. Agreed, but being legal, doesn't make something moral or right.
For instance, in many countries in the world female genital mutilation is fully legal, but I don't imagine the writer supports this practice. Yet in these countries where this practice is performed, sanctioned and legal, it occurs because like "pro-abortion persons", pro-female-genital-mutilation persons also wish to "equally...have the opportunity to live according to their belief system."
A belief system is no guarantee of legitimacy or of rightness.