Or at least, that's what we are meant to believe.
In which parallel universe would the MASSIVE micro-manager Harper allow a backbencher to break away from the official party line?
So, it's probably safe to assume that even if Woodworth and PMSHithead were both to claim plausible deniability regarding the K-W MP's initiative, somebody in the PMO∕Politburo had a little chat with the backbencher to map out the tactic and to rein him in if he started dancing outside those lines.
I'm listening to Radio-Canada's phone-in political program; all the callers see through this little ploy.
Let's accept, for the sake of argument, that Woodworth's project to consider the status and the wellbeing of the zygote, embryo and fetus were sincere. Why not strike a Royal Commission and consider it from that perspective, as well as examining what the quality of life should be for potential and actually born infants? But then, it would become apparent that the reformaTory imperative to control and punish women is a minority view that should not take precedence over the rational and heartfelt arguments that pro-choice organizations like the Canadian Medical Association and the Canadian Bar Association would present, as well as the perspectives multitudes of women's groups would express.
It's not happenstance that Woodworth is attacking women's right to choose through the Criminal Code. Ken Epp tried it in 2008 and Harper voted in support of his private member's bill C-484, as Hélène Buzetti reminded us.
The Harper government's agenda includes the criminalization of abortion. This is now clear, though the Cons lie about their intent. This is the first step in a campaign strategy based on the incremental erosion of women's access to contraception and the right for each woman to stop a pregnancy or to carry it to term.
Human zygote, embryo, fetus are potential human beings. During gestation, pregnant women give life. They are not passive breeders. The Cons want to use the Criminal Code to award nascent beings rights that will trump those of pregnant women.
We will not let them do this.
UPDATE: Parliamentary procedural information from Kady O'Malley, here.
1 comment:
So, as Alison and Kady note, drop the needle on this committee and the abortion debate is on and open for business after the solemn 'ritual filing off of the serial numbers' we see so often from the Conservatives and Republicans.
Abortion? they will gasp with wide, plausible deniability eyes, why, no one has said *that* word atALL, we're just debating when a human being is a human being after all, becuz...becuz there's been this disturbing legal trend since the 1980s to consider women human beings and something's got to be done about that becuz...Liberals!
And how much will this oh-so-necessary committee cost in times when women are facing greater and greater economic stress to support themselves and their children? And will Woodworth be chairing it? And will the Conservatives on it having this sober, reasoned conversation include Trost, Bruinooge, and Vellacott? Because men are always reasoned in argument, especially about matters concerning women's rights.
With a Conservative majority, who knows what other committees will be struck this way, born out of related Conversations? Perhaps, 'Science, mere theories foisted on gullible youth and long suffering political leaders or proselytizing cult of Liberal subversives? Discuss'
Post a Comment