Are women in danger of losing their abortion rights?

Harry · April 21, 2011

So here we go again, as the abortion issue always seeems to rear its ugly head around election time. This is the 21st century folks, not the 16th.

Tories forced off message, scramble to douse abortion fire after MPs comments
Conservative Saskatchewan backbencher bragging in a weekend speech that International Planned Parenthood Federation had its funding blocked because it supported abortion.

Candidate Brad Trost reportedly told a pro-life meeting in Saskatchewan that the efforts of the movement had likely denied the organization funding after decades of receiving it.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5jBYsVoReW5lcMUIbyjKZvkl6BB8A?docId=6629857

Edited April 21, 2011 by Harry

Harry · April 21, 2011

This is unbelievably sad.

Ottawa cutting funds to Planned Parenthood, Tory MP says
After thanking those who signed petitions to defund the International Planned Parenthood Federation, a group that provides assistance with birth control and maternal health, he told the audience how his office had spearheaded the campaign and how other MPs had helped him.

Let me tell you, and I cannot tell you specifically how we used it but those petitions were very, very useful and they were part of what we used to defund Planned Parenthood, because it has been an absolute disgrace that this organization and several others like it have been receiving one penny of Canadian taxpayers dollars, he said in a recording of the speech

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-cutting-funds-to-planned-parenthood-tory-mp-says/article1993971/

Edited April 21, 2011 by Harry

Molly · April 21, 2011

Ah, yes. That guy!

Misogynist and homophobe... loose cannon......he's Pankiw lite. He's been stinking up the back benches long enough to get a pension, and is used to keep the dinosaurs happy.

I liked this comment:http://www.prairiedogmag.com/?p=22028

"This MP is not a rouge rogue extremist–this is the attitude of the Stephen Harper Conservatives. They’re riddled with religious kooks* (and don’t get me started on their homophobia).

This is just terrible. If you support this party as it is currently behaving, you clearly oppose woman’s rights and more importantly their health.

You should reconsider your political affiliation this election. Unless you’re comfortable with all the nice, smart, funny people thinking you’re an asshole.

*Get used to this mean term–I’m bringing it back because it’s accurate, memorable shorthand for a certain brand of lunacy the Conservatives are uniquely prone to among political parties. If you are religious and not a kook, I’m not talking about you. “Religious” is the adjective, not the noun. The key word is “kook”.

----------

Harry · April 21, 2011

This issue now will rise like a wildfire across the land.

Abortion and hidden agendas: Brad Trost set to be this year's Cheryl Gallant

http://davidakin.blogware.com/blog/_archives/2011/4/21/4800034.html

scribblet · April 21, 2011

Ah, yes. That guy!

Misogynist and homophobe... loose cannon......he's Pankiw lite. He's been stinking up the back benches long enough to get a pension, and is used to keep the dinosaurs happy.

I liked this comment:http://www.prairiedogmag.com/?p=22028

"This MP is not a rouge rogue extremist–this is the attitude of the Stephen Harper Conservatives. They’re riddled with religious kooks* (and don’t get me started on their homophobia).

----------

Oh sure they <sarcasm here> El Toro Poo Poo and then some.

Sir Bandelot · April 21, 2011

It's been suspected before, and these types of people (and other even more incorrigible slime) keep making an appearance in the CPC. Wonder why Mr. Harper has to keep a tight lid on everyone..?

M.Dancer · April 21, 2011

Wonder why Mr. Harper has to keep a tight lid on everyone..?

Because as he has stated over and over, there is no plan or agenda to open the debate and change the rules.

Shakeyhands · April 21, 2011

Because as he has stated over and over, there is no plan or agenda to open the debate and change the rules.

The proof however, isn't in the pudding if there is any truth to what trost is saying. It amounts to back door legislation attacking womens reproductive rights. The scary scary rears it's ugly head when people read this stuff. Imagine a majority in the Senate and a majority in the House, what happens then?

Molly · April 21, 2011

Because as he has stated over and over, there is no plan or agenda to open the debate and change the rules.

And yet kooks ^TM like this seem to thrive in his caucus, and somehow, the funding, never denied, just never seems to be apprpved either. How very odd.

M.Dancer · April 21, 2011

The proof however, isn't in the pudding if there is any truth to what trost is saying. It amounts to back door legislation attacking womens reproductive rights. The scary scary rears it's ugly head when people read this stuff. Imagine a majority in the Senate and a majority in the House, what happens then?

No it amount to groups not be funded. They do not have a god given right to funding..and they are perfectly capable if they have wide support to raise it themselves.

scribblet · April 21, 2011

Because as he has stated over and over, there is no plan or agenda to open the debate and change the rules.

Exactly, but people do buy into the scary scary tactics and believe what they are told.

However, it does bring up the issue of rights and freedom of expression, there are many people who strongly believe that abortion is wrong,in both parties, they don't see abortion as a women's 'right', they see it as murder, an argument that IMO will never go away. They are entitled to a voice in a democratic gov't and MPs have a right to put forward private bills on the issue (and do)that's the way our system works. If I remember correctly Liberal MP Paul Steckle introduced a bill to ban abortions, someone will keep on doing it.

From what I read in the article, no decision has been made on the funding, although I thought the issue was settled last year.

August1991 · April 21, 2011

Cue the scary music.... That Harper is just downright scary, and the people behind him all think that The Flintsones was a documentary.[/sarcasm]

A divisive parliamentary vote designed to smoke out the Harper government's attitude to funding foreign abortions came and went Tuesday with voters none the wiser on Conservative policy — or that of the Liberal Opposition, for that matter.
Liberal MP Bob Rae's motion concerning a maternal health initiative at this summer's G8 summit was nominally supported by all three opposition parties in the Commons, but was defeated 144-138 when a number of Liberal MPs failed to show up for the vote.

Three staunchly pro-life Liberals also voted with the Tories.

Toronto Star

ToadBrother · April 21, 2011

No it amount to groups not be funded. They do not have a god given right to funding..and they are perfectly capable if they have wide support to raise it themselves.

Still, whether you're a Tory supporter or not, having some moronic backbencher suddenly pop up declaring the end of such funding and thanking anti-abortion groups during an election is not exactly in the best interests of the Tories. Soudas has now gone out of his way to remind everyone that Trost ia backbencher, so we'll see if this blunder can be fixed.

Molly · April 21, 2011

:lol:

Yes... three. Three too many, but at least it wasn't the whole blessed bot-herd.

I cannot now, and never will be able to abide the stunning arrogance that would insert smug bystanders into something so important, and so deeply personal.

Dopes like this guy... he's an embarrassment to his constituency, his province, his gender, his race, his religion his generation, his (any other way you want to measure him).. but not, apparently, to his political party.

M.Dancer · April 21, 2011

Still, whether you're a Tory supporter or not, having some moronic backbencher suddenly pop up declaring the end of such funding and thanking anti-abortion groups during an election is not exactly in the best interests of the Tories. Soudas has now gone out of his way to remind everyone that Trost ia backbencher, so we'll see if this blunder can be fixed.

No kidding, tory, liberal same old same old...

Molly · April 21, 2011

Still, whether you're a Tory supporter or not, having some moronic backbencher suddenly pop up declaring the end of such funding and thanking anti-abortion groups during an election is not exactly in the best interests of the Tories. Soudas has now gone out of his way to remind everyone that Trost ia backbencher, so we'll see if this blunder can be fixed.

He's a back bencher who has been given a lot more latitude and responsibility than dull-knife loose cannons generally get. The shots he took at Diane Ablonczy over Pride funding, for instance, would have had a lot of folks hustled toward the door, fast.

This is a message the Conservatives want on the table. Maybe not everywhere during an election, but they want it out there. They'd like to have it both ways, but it doesn't really work that way. No party tent is big enough for (both him and me).

wyly · April 21, 2011

just as they intend to go after the gun registry again if elected they'll go after abortion rights as well if they get a majority...

it'll be just as duceppe predicted, it won't be the cpc that brings it to the table it'll a private members bill which the then majority conservatives will approve...

Edited April 21, 2011 by wyly

scribblet · April 21, 2011

just as they intend to go after the gun registry again if elected they'll go after abortion rights as well if they get a majority...

it'll be just as duceppe predicted, it won't be the cpc that brings it to the table it'll a private members bill which the then majority conservatives will approve...

So far they haven't approved other attempts. Women are not in danger of losing abortion rights, what you might see is majority support for limits on late term, which the majority of people support. I believe it's 24 weeks in Britain, and in Sweden they must get permission after 18 weeks. IMO 24 weeks except for health reasons is a reasonable compromise./

August1991 · April 21, 2011

No kidding, tory, liberal same old same old...

The following website provides a detailed survey of the opinion on abortion of current MPs: Some Website

Here's the key data:

MPs Before 2008 Election | After 2008 Election
Total Anti-choice MPs 123 (40%) | 120 (39%)

- Conservative Party 95 of 127 (75%) | 99 of 143 (69%)

- Liberal Party 26 of 95 (27%) | 19 of 77 (25%)

- Independent 2 2

Total Pro-Choice MPs 125* (41%) | 124* (40%)

Total MPs with unknown stance 56 (18%) | 64 (21%)

Total MPs 304 308

IOW, many Conservative MPs are pro-choice while many Liberal MPs are pro-life. This issue crosses party lines and it is wrong to say that a Conservative vote is a pro-life vote.

In any case, this is what Harper has said in the past (2008):

“We have a lot of challenges in front of the country,” Mr. Harper said during an announcement about arts and fitness funding for children. “We have a difficult world economy, as we all know. That has to be the focus of the government and I simply have no intention of ever making the abortion question a focus of my political career.”
Mr. Harper said that while some members of his caucus, as well as some Liberals, would like him to make abortion a priority, “I have not done that in my entire political career. Don't intend to start now.”

“I have been clear throughout my entire political career I don't intend to open the abortion issue,” he said. “I haven't in the past; I'm not going to in the future.”

G&M

-----

Keep in mind that the current debate is not about abortion as such. It is only about funding of a third world aid group that advocates abortion abroad. (The curious thing about this is that abortion in places like India or China is often used to ensure that a woman has a son.)

Harry · April 21, 2011

Sorry but I just don't believe Harper on the abortion issue. Harper has blatantly lied about trying to take power away from PM Paul Martin, so why should he be believed on the abortion issue. Why is Harper afraid to tell us his decision about Planned Parenthood now. We all know why. And women's abortion rights are going to be lost through the back door in Canada. Where there is smoke, there is fire!

Conservatives scramble to head off brewing controversy over abortion
Brad Trost told an anti-abortion group on the weekend that International Planned Parenthood Federation has been denied Canadian funding because it supports abortion.

NDP Leader Jack Layton called the reports "worrying" and said his party strongly supports "a woman's right to choose."

He says Trost's remarks imply the Tories harbour a hidden agenda on abortion.

International Co-operation Minister Bev Oda issued a statement insisting Planned Parenthood would get funding if its application "falls within the government's parameters."

Layton said the brewing controversy "certainly gives us concerns about the Conservative approach."

Conservative spokesman Dimitri Soudas summoned journalists in the middle of the night to address the Trost reports and sing the praises of the government's G8 initiative on child and maternal health.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5hxjJnwR-SKXaULyvr-rERFH4DluA?docId=6629535

scribblet · April 21, 2011

Yes... three. Three too many, but at least it wasn't the whole blessed bot-herd.

No, the rest of the bot-herd skipped so they wouldn't have to vote LOL

Molly · April 21, 2011

The following website provides a detailed survey of the opinion on abortion of current MPs: Some Website

Here's the key data:

IOW, many Conservative MPs are pro-choice while many Liberal MPs are pro-life. This issue crosses party lines and it is wrong to say that a Conservative vote is a pro-life vote.

In any case, this is what Harper has said in the past (2008):G&M

-----

Keep in mind that the current debate is not about abortion as such. It is only about funding of a third world aid group that advocates abortion abroad. (The curious thing about this is that abortion in places like India or China is often used to ensure that a woman has a son.)

Ha! Your own numbers call the lie to your conclusion!!! What's more even if you were right (that conservative=/=anti-choice, Liberal=/= pro-choice in real numbers) Conservatives are whipped to anti-choice positions, while the Liberals are whipped to pro-choice.

And buddy, if you think that this is only about 3rd world aid, then you are well and truly 'wandering around behind the little animals'.

Shady · April 21, 2011

This whole story is pretty silly. As has already been stated, pro-life MPs also exist in other Canadian political parties. And in terms of Canadians attitudes towards abortion, we're becoming less and less comfortable with abortion on demand, without any regulations. In fact, Canada is the only industrialized country without any regulations regarding abortion. But that's a seperate issue.

Because one backbencher expresses an opinion, somehow that means people are going to lose their so-called abortion rights? Does that mean when a socialist/communist member of the NDP speaks his mind, Canadians are in danger of losing their private property rights? Actually, bad example. It probably does.

Shady · April 21, 2011

Conservatives are whipped to anti-choice positions, while the Liberals are whipped to pro-choice.

It's more like Conservatives are whipped to a pro-science position, while Liberals are whipped to an anti-science position.

August1991 · April 21, 2011

Ha! Your own numbers call the lie to your conclusion!!! What's more even if you were right (that conservative=/=anti-choice, Liberal=/= pro-choice in real numbers) Conservatives are whipped to anti-choice positions, while the Liberals are whipped to pro-choice.

About 40 Conservative MPs are not pro-Life while about 20 Liberal MPs are. This issue crosses party lines.

No vote on abortion would be whipped. Harper has made that abundantly clear. He's also made clear he has many other priorities.

And buddy, if you think that this is only about 3rd world aid, then you are well and truly 'wandering around behind the little animals'.

It is about third world aid, and many people might oppose funding Planned Parenthood even if they happen to be pro-choice.

----

Look Molly, there is zero chance of you voting for teh Conservatives and I can see that you are fervently pro-choice. I'm not trying to convince you to change your opinion.

I just happen to think that it is hypocritical for the Liberals to raise this issue, and it is just plain wrong to say that Harper is going to criminalize abortion.

In pure political terms, this kind of "scary, scary, hidden agenda" talk has no effect on potential Conservative voters. The opposition has played this card so many times that no listens anymore. Harper has been PM for five years and the sky is still blue.