Jonathon Van Maren from the Canadian Centre for Bioethical Reform interviews Senior Legal Counsel of Americans United for Life, Clarke Forsythe (author of “Politics for the Greatest Good: The Case for Prudence in the Public Square”; and “Abuse of Discretion: The Inside Story of Roe v Wade”) about the virtue of prudence and how it relates to legally limiting the harm of abortion.
Whenever I listen to, or read about, providing some legal limits for pre-born children in Canada, I feel sad. I know there are some pro-life people who don't believe that incremental/gestational limits are moral. I hope they will listen to Jonathon's interview with Clarke Forsythe.
I also imagine that this fact causes the pro-abortions to rub their hands together with glee. They hope that because there are those who would never support a partial ban on abortion, that Canada's any-time-any-reason-tax-payer-funded abortion regime, is safe from change.
As it is, we already have an uphill battle trying to change the status quo on abortion. This just makes the battle more difficult.
I can't imagine why any reasonable Canadian would oppose a ban on late-term abortions. But there are some. And they lie on both ends of the abortion debate.
Showing posts with label Canadian Centre for Bioethical Reform. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Canadian Centre for Bioethical Reform. Show all posts
Saturday, January 25, 2014
Monday, September 24, 2012
Pro-choice
I think our MPs need to look at what the folks over at CCBR are doing.
They might want to rethink whether or not they still want to vote against Stephen Woodworth's motion 312.
There's nothing like the unvarnished truth of watching an abortion procedure--juxtaposed with Joyce Arthur speaking about her dogma of "women's rights"--to make you sit up and take notice.
If this is what "women's rights" is all about, could any MP actually vote against the motion?
What about the rest of us. Do we really believe in "women's rights"?
From CCBR's press release:
"Anti-Abortion Group Releases Most Shocking Abortion Footage Yet Leading Abortion Rights Advocate's Words Exposed
September 24, 2012. The Toronto and Calgary-based pro-life organization the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform (CCBR: http://www.unmaskingchoice.ca) released a video showing Joyce Arthur, the head of the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada, defending abortion intercut with footage of an abortion procedure in-progress and abortion's results.
The video can be viewed here:
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/0XzVjYXuCWs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
"The recent debate on Motion 312 has been dominated by the worst kind of sophistry from Canada's abortion advocates," explained executive director Stephanie Gray, "So we decided to make a video unmasking the rhetoric so Canadians understand what abortion advocates mean when they say things like 'choice' and 'reproductive freedom.'"
The video, which the pro-life organization promises is the first in a series of many, shows interviews of Ms. Arthur talking about the "social peace" Canada has reached on the abortion issue while playing gruesome footage.
Gray explained, "Canada's abortion advocates have been permitted to talk about abortion for too long without people knowing what 'abortion' actually refers to. From now on, we plan to use video footage of what this horrific procedure actually looks like to show abortion as the act of dismemberment, decapitation, and disembowelment that it is."
They might want to rethink whether or not they still want to vote against Stephen Woodworth's motion 312.
There's nothing like the unvarnished truth of watching an abortion procedure--juxtaposed with Joyce Arthur speaking about her dogma of "women's rights"--to make you sit up and take notice.
If this is what "women's rights" is all about, could any MP actually vote against the motion?
What about the rest of us. Do we really believe in "women's rights"?
From CCBR's press release:
"Anti-Abortion Group Releases Most Shocking Abortion Footage Yet Leading Abortion Rights Advocate's Words Exposed
September 24, 2012. The Toronto and Calgary-based pro-life organization the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform (CCBR: http://www.unmaskingchoice.ca) released a video showing Joyce Arthur, the head of the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada, defending abortion intercut with footage of an abortion procedure in-progress and abortion's results.
The video can be viewed here:
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/0XzVjYXuCWs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
"The recent debate on Motion 312 has been dominated by the worst kind of sophistry from Canada's abortion advocates," explained executive director Stephanie Gray, "So we decided to make a video unmasking the rhetoric so Canadians understand what abortion advocates mean when they say things like 'choice' and 'reproductive freedom.'"
The video, which the pro-life organization promises is the first in a series of many, shows interviews of Ms. Arthur talking about the "social peace" Canada has reached on the abortion issue while playing gruesome footage.
Gray explained, "Canada's abortion advocates have been permitted to talk about abortion for too long without people knowing what 'abortion' actually refers to. From now on, we plan to use video footage of what this horrific procedure actually looks like to show abortion as the act of dismemberment, decapitation, and disembowelment that it is."
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
An inconvenient truth
The pro-abortions get really cranky when the truth about abortion is shown out there in the world for all to see.
In particular, they don't like that the Canadian Centre for Bioethical Reform (CCBR) uses photos that show pictures of dead fetuses. These photos make it kind of hard to deny that fetuses exist. You see, if we just pretend that fetuses don't exist, then it follows that nothing actually dies during an abortion. But pictures of dead fetuses blows that pretense out of the water.
The solution for the pro-abortions is to come up with a new imaginary notion--that pictures of these dead fetuses in all its graphic horror somehow constitutes hate speech:
"If anti-choice activities, like those undertaken by the CCBR in co-operation with anti-choice campus clubs, are deemed to be hateful, this justifies a restriction in civil liberties. Establishing that the activities of such extreme anti-choice activities are hateful has thus been one of the primary goals of student pro-choice advocates."
How does the truth equal hate speech? Well of course, it doesn't. No matter--because the pro-abortions are on a roll. They've got a brand new bandwagon to jump on, that runs alongside their "reproductive health" and "reproductive rights" and "reproductive choice" euphemisms...now they have invented "reproductive justice."
So tell me, do the pro-abortions also want "reproductive justice" for the women who want to KEEP their babies? Nope. At the end of this new abortion manifesto, they clearly come out against the Unborn Victims of Crime Act. Why? Well, Joyce Arthur let slip the real motivation behind opposition to that bill when she told Charles Lewis of the National Post:
“If the fetuses are recognized in this bill, it could bleed into people’s consciousness and make people change their minds about abortion.” (“Fetal rights stir debate on abortion,” by Charles Lewis, National Post, March 1, 2008).
We cannot under any circumstances protect those choices. As long as the choice is abortion--it's a go. Just don't let the truth of dead fetuses get in the way of "reproductive justice".
In particular, they don't like that the Canadian Centre for Bioethical Reform (CCBR) uses photos that show pictures of dead fetuses. These photos make it kind of hard to deny that fetuses exist. You see, if we just pretend that fetuses don't exist, then it follows that nothing actually dies during an abortion. But pictures of dead fetuses blows that pretense out of the water.
The solution for the pro-abortions is to come up with a new imaginary notion--that pictures of these dead fetuses in all its graphic horror somehow constitutes hate speech:
"If anti-choice activities, like those undertaken by the CCBR in co-operation with anti-choice campus clubs, are deemed to be hateful, this justifies a restriction in civil liberties. Establishing that the activities of such extreme anti-choice activities are hateful has thus been one of the primary goals of student pro-choice advocates."
How does the truth equal hate speech? Well of course, it doesn't. No matter--because the pro-abortions are on a roll. They've got a brand new bandwagon to jump on, that runs alongside their "reproductive health" and "reproductive rights" and "reproductive choice" euphemisms...now they have invented "reproductive justice."
So tell me, do the pro-abortions also want "reproductive justice" for the women who want to KEEP their babies? Nope. At the end of this new abortion manifesto, they clearly come out against the Unborn Victims of Crime Act. Why? Well, Joyce Arthur let slip the real motivation behind opposition to that bill when she told Charles Lewis of the National Post:
“If the fetuses are recognized in this bill, it could bleed into people’s consciousness and make people change their minds about abortion.” (“Fetal rights stir debate on abortion,” by Charles Lewis, National Post, March 1, 2008).
We cannot under any circumstances protect those choices. As long as the choice is abortion--it's a go. Just don't let the truth of dead fetuses get in the way of "reproductive justice".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)