Monday, 17 November 2008

Back to the Barricades!

Remember this guy? Mr. Kicking Abortion's Ass Bill, in whose honour we nicknamed Ken Epp's private member's Bill C-484, the bill that was Totally Not About Abortion, until the Cons threw it under the bus because it 'might' reopen the abortion 'debate'.

Well, it seems the FFs at the recent Conservatard Convention may have learned something.

They passed a resolution verrrry much like the Kicking Abortion's Ass Bill but looky here:

Although the resolution does indicate a pro-life sentiment among Canadian Conservatives, in an interview with LifeSiteNews.com, John Hoff, President of Campaign Life Coalition B.C., reminded pro-life activists to take this resolution for what it really is – one seeking to protect pregnant women and not unborn babies.

"As the President of Campaign Life Coalition of B.C., P-207 is not a resolution I would propose to protect unborn children. As much as I stand up for the lives of pregnant women, this resolution doesn't do anything for unborn children," said Hoff.

Hoff said the resolution is one which he wholeheartedly supports and that it is a great step forward in protecting pregnant women. However, he indicated that pro-life supporters should keep their mouths shut about it being about recriminalizing abortion feet on the ground.

However, someone's whose feet were actually on the ground at ConCon, liveblogging as much as they'd let him, Dr. Dawg, put it like this:

It became pretty obvious that the "protecting pregnant women" resolution (P-207) was all fetuses all the time.

Yup. That's pretty much what we expected.

Bookmark this page again. *sigh* We're going back to the barricades.

ETA: Check out Danielle Takacs who was also there liveblogging. She has the down-and-dirty details.

4 comments:

Pseudz said...

Brava! Danielle Takacs

Are the pols bound by the resolutions that passed?

How could a majority possibly be generated with those underpinnings to the con platform - puts the UNDER back in underpinning.

fern hill said...

I read somewhere that these resolutions are non-binding on the party. Kinda makes one wonder why they bother, eh?

Beijing York said...

Non-binding because authoritarian Steve says so. Perhaps the CONS should focus on democratic reform within their own party before they set out to saddle us with a US-style elected Senate.

Speaking of which, seems to me like there were few economic issues brought up overall at the Convention. In fact, there seemed to be little fulsome discussion on some of the economic nuggets tossed out by Harper and Flaherty like privatization and further bail outs.

deBeauxOs said...

pseudz said: "Brava! Danielle Takacs"

I think that I read every word she rigorously blogged about the Con Con. Danielle could give Kady a run for her money, I say.

Post a Comment

Post a Comment