Despite being on this beat for more than five years, I did not fully grasp the rift between fetus fetishists when it comes to the incremental (aka 'Fucking Women Over in As Many Ways Possible' [FWOIAMWAP]) and gestational limits strategies on abortion.
Of the nine responders, only four support gestational limits.
The Catlicks and looniest loons don't support them because the instant egg meets sperm -- BOOM! -- there is an itty-bitty proto-person that just needs some more time in the oven. To allow abortion up to some point -- any point -- is to condone murder.
And. Also. They don't work.
European pro-life leaders which have gestational limits have told us repeatedly that gestational laws do nothing to prevent abortion but only assuage the public conscience.If Woody's Wank passes and a committee of MPs get to hear 'expert' evidence from prebornchildologists from which they conclude that a 'human being' is sufficiently
But some people will be. Both Stephanie Gray of Fetal Gore Tour fame and Mark Peninga of the Association for Reformed Political Action, which is the backer of We Need a Law, support both gestational limits and FWOIAMWAP.
ARPA Canada is convicted that gestational restrictions on abortion can be a prudent and principled means to restrict abortion to the greatest extent possible. Doing politics means working with what is possible. . . . Canada is a secular nation that does not respect God’s standards about the value of human life.While demonstrating a spark of rationality over Canada's pro-choice stance, he continues to outline the antichoice delusion that Canadians really really really want SOME KINDA LAW DAMMIT.
But of course that won't be good enough.
And if we are blessed with restrictions, we must press on and keep working for more.It will never be over for them.
All of them, however, are totally behind the FWOIAMWAP approach Here, at least, they are refreshing honest.
Alissa Golob of Campaign Life Coalition Youth said:
I support incremental approaches such as parental notification, complete informed consent, defunding and ultrasound laws; basically any law that would make it extremely difficult for women to obtain abortions.While the accompanying cartoon shows the usual featureless female incubators, the words 'women' or 'woman' appear just four times in the responses, once in the quote above and these.
Recently we have witnessed our opponents willingness to sacrifice the women of tomorrow to safeguard abortion for the women of today.One more point made by SUZY here.
. . . incremental measures such as defunding, women’s right to know, medically necessary abortions, conscience legislation and the unborn victims of violence.
I only found out about five years ago that Campaign Life Coalition opposed gestational limits.Yes, just imagine what they don't know. . .
And to me, the fact that I did not know this salient fact about CLC strategy spoke to a problem I see in the pro-life movement.
We're still a very fragmented group of people with a relatively weak sense of community, and that limits our ability to mobilize. I was involved in a pro-life community for some years and didn't know this point.
So I'm thinking: if I, with my regular contact with Campaign Life, didn't know this, imagine what other pro-lifers don't know...
In the continuing wank that JJ calls the Masturdebate, let's ask supporters of M312 if they would be good with gestational limits.
If not, why not? If so, at what point? If it's murder after 12 or whatever weeks, what do you call it before that point?
Let's help drive that wedge.