March for Lies A Bust

I'm calling it. March for Lies was a huge bust. Look at all the weaselling.

LifeShite:

Up to 25,000 pro-lifers packed Parliament Hill today under threats of thunderstorms. The bad weather, however, held out, providing sunny conditions for the 16th National March for Life.

This year was another record-breaking year for the federal parliament's largest annual rally. Organizers estimated the crowd at likely near 25,000 given the evident substantial increase in numbers over last year, when the count was 19,500.

Because, you know, every year must be bigger than the year before. And 19,500 was a pretty large porky last year.

Other news outlets were a bit more cautious.

More than 10,000 people joined the 16th annual anti-abortion March for Life on Parliament Hill Thursday, with several Conservative MPs adding their support to the throng.  A small group of pro-choice advocates staged counter-demonstrations.

But the real knee to the nads comes from Stun News.

A count of the crowd by QMI Agency set the attendance of Thursday's rally at about 5,000.

The RCMP estimated a crowd of 12,000, while organizers said there were 15,000.

And now a note from the Martyrdom and Mail, aka Kicking Abortion's Ass:

Just heard from a friend of the family that the cops prohibited the last 2000 people on the Hill from marching. Probably couldn’t handle the numbers. Too many people. In the future, there will be so many people on the Hill, it will overflow to the Streets. There won’t be any room to march.

Buses carry, what, 50-60 people? So that's 35 to 40 buses diverted, cordoned off, or something by police?

Yeah, right.

And nothing says 'take us seriously' like a bunch of men in feathered hats.

ENOUGH KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS TO BESIEGE A SMALL CASTLE. #MFLtwitpic.com/cpf2uj

— InfoAlerteBot (@InfoAlerteBot) May 9, 2013

The last word goes to veteran March of the Feti watcher, David Akin.

I say again: March For Life easily the largest annual protest on the Hill - and all to absolutely no effect. #cdnpoli #mfl

— David Akin (@davidakin) May 9, 2013

The real tell is that they're not even protesting the numbers very hard this year.

They know it was a bust.

Hill Cam shot from 1:15 yesterday. That look like even 15,000 people to you?

In Canada, Pro-Choice Is Winning

If you've been wondering about fetus fetishists crowing about winning and pro-choice losing lately, this TIME magazine cover story is what it's about.

Amanda Marcotte responds.

There's much to like about Kate Pickert's Time cover story (hidden behind a paywall) on abortion rights 40 years after Roe v. Wade. Unlike the majority of big media stories on this issue, this one actually portrays abortion patients accurately, particularly pointing out how most of them are grown adults with children at home and notes the wide range of feminist activism—from fighting for women's economic rights to promoting contraception access—that actually results in lower abortion rates. Pickert even mentions the phrase "reproductive justice," a framework that takes a more holistic approach to improving people's reproductive lives and one that appeals strongly to younger activists, especially activists of color.

Too bad, then, that Pickert portrays the increasing restrictions on abortion access as the result of the failings of the pro-choice movement, a narrative which inevitably leads to blaming pro-choicers for being "hard line," "tone deaf," and lacking "nuance."

She tries to pass the whole deal off as 'business as usual'.

Two-steps-forward-one-step-back is the ugly reality of progressive politics.

That's often true, but not necessarily.

In Canada, we did it differently.

Merkin feminists won the right to abortion on January 22, 1973 with the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade.

Immediately legislatures around the country started enacted restrictions.

In response to Roe v. Wade, most states enacted or attempted to enact laws limiting or regulating abortion. . . Congress in 1976 passed the Hyde Amendment, barring federal funding of abortions (except in the case of rape, incest, or life of the woman) for poor women through the Medicaid program. The Supreme Court struck down several state restrictions on abortions in a long series of cases stretching from the mid-1970s to the late 1980s, but upheld restrictions on funding, including the Hyde Amendment, in the case of Harris v. McRae (1980).

Merkin feminists have been fighting -- and largely losing -- rearguard skirmishes ever since.

Canadians watched in horror as the huge victory got nibbled to death by ducks.

We were like the younger sister. We got to watch Big Sis make terrible mistakes. And like the smart younger sister, we learned. We vowed to ourselves the political equivalent of 'blue eyeshadow is NEVER a good idea'.

It took 15 more years in Canada, until January 28, 1988, to achieve our victory, R. v. Morgentaler.

But because we watched and learned, we were ready for the ducks. Every time -- every fucking time -- the fetus fetishists show signs of screwing around with our rights, we act.

Recently, with Ken Epp's Kicking Abortion's Ass Bill, we were a little slow off the mark.

So when Woodworth's Wank, aka Motion 312 surfaced, we were ready.

And we are ready for its sequel, Warawa's Wank, aka Motion 408.

As a matter of fact, the more the so-called debate heats up here in Canada, the more support we gain.

So, bring it, fetus fetishists.

We watched Big Sis fuck up.

We won't.

ADDED: Joyce Arthur's excellent Rabble piece on The Benefits of Decriminalizing Abortion.

In Their Own Words

The thing about dog whistles is that dogs yap when they hear them.

Back in 2008, while Ken Epp was insisting that his private member's bill, C484, the 'Unborn Victims of Crime' bill, had absotively nothing, nada, zip, zero to do with abortion, our old pal Johnny 'Tubesock Holocaust' Pacheco kinda blew that gaffe by calling it Kicking Abortion's Ass Bill.

Now, a Catlick organ has done it for Woodworth's Wank. Look at the headline.

Personhood motion to get more time

This is how they see it, people. This is the first step towards creating personhood for zygotes and restricting the rights of incubators.



Thanks to JJ for the webcache link.



ADDED: Of course, Tubesock himself calls it a 'personhoood' motion.

^NOT the sharpest knife in the drawer.

As fern hill demonstrated in the previous blogpost, the dumbassitude bar has been set low, when CPC MPs claim they're the smartest guy in the room.

MP Woodworth has been working on this Motion 312 - his anti-science project for awhile now.

Choice Joyce at Abortions Rights of Canada has exhibit XY:

Attention supporters! We need to help out Stephen Woodworth because the poor guy lacks imagination. He couldn't even think of a title for his motion! Let's help him out by naming his motion for him. Please email your clever, funny, or subversive titles to info@arcc-cdac.ca. We'll pick the best one and go public with it!

Joyce ArthurExecutive DirectorAbortion Rights Coalition of Canada (ARCC) joycearthur@shaw.cawww.arcc-cdac.ca

This contest has spilled onto Twitter, of course. Check out some of these #M312 gems:

"Women Aren't Persons Unless Childbearing Act"

"Motion to Regress and Oppress"

"Kanada's Kinder, Küche, Kirche Act"

"Hidden Abortion Agenda Motion" or HAAM

"The Handmaid's Tale' Motion."

"The *Catholic Sharia* Pregnancy Control Act"

"The Coathanger of White Male Prominence act"

The "Everything I Know About Being Pregnant I Learned From Watching TLC" Motion

So far, the usual zygote zealots and womb zombies have been unusually quiet. They probably learned their lesson from the last or perhaps before-last time they counted their preborns before they were hatched.

Bill C484 will be forever known as "Kicking Abortion's Ass" because John "Sperm Holocaust" Pacheco unfortunately crowed about it passing 1st reading in the House.

Exactly how would Stevie guarantee 'anti-abortion' legislation is defeated?

I have some questions about the 'not reopen the abortion issue' brouhaha.

Here's what Motherhood Steve had to say:

“As long as I am prime minister we are not opening the abortion debate,” Mr. Harper declared. “The government will not bring forward any such legislation and any such legislation that is brought forward will be defeated as long as I am prime minister.”

Kady is allll over the mechanics of 'will be defeated' bit. Basically, how?

Whip the vote on private members' bills? Somehow block the stacked Senate from passing? Institute a Prime Ministerial veto?

Kady has asked the CPC so-called War Room and will report as will I.

My other question is: Who will define what 'anti-abortion' legislation is?

Because remember the sponsors of the last two private members' sneaky back-door attempts to throw up barriers to legal abortion both swore up hill and down dale that their bills had nothing, nada, zip, zero, to do with abortion. Both Bruinooge and Epp lied their asses off all over the country on any media that would have them, saying that anyone who thought their bills had anything to do with abortion were paranoid libtard feminazis.

Well, except for the base, who definitely heard the dog whistle. Our fave, Mr Kicking Abortion's Ass, said so quite triumphantly.

I want Peter Mansbridge to get a clear answer to this in the much-touted interview tonight.

I also want a pony.

Fetus Fetishists Running in 2011 Election

Vote them out.

Reminder: Ken Epp's Bill C-484, aka Kicking Abortion's Ass Bill. Rod Bruinooge's Bill C-510, aka Roxanne's Law.

Still Stringing the Fetus Fetishists Along

LifeShite is reporting that The Stringing Fetus Fetishists Along Bill will get its first hour of debate next Monday.

Bill C-510 is bathetically styled 'Roxanne's Law' after a woman who was NOT -- contrary to the lying liars' claim -- murdered because she refused to have an abortion.

On Monday, Rod Bruinooge and his merry band of misogynists will no doubt spout a bunch of bullshit about the MASSIVE numbers of women coerced into abortion.

Alas, to no avail. Stevie Spiteful has already nixed the deal.

There will be another hour of debate in December then a vote.

Then we'll be done with this round of Kicking Abortion's Ass.

Until the next one.

More So Conned Reaction

Or, 'Another Instalment of DJ! Visits the Freaks So You Don't Have To'.

It's still early days for measuring the so-conned reaction to Stevie Peevie's steel-toed boot to their forced-pregnancy delusion, but it seems to me there are -- so far -- three identifiable types.

First, the over-reacting emotional dimbulb, example here being Cecilia:

Do you think Harper has secret prolife plan? He doesn't. Harper is a pro abortion zealot. He'll never let any type of abortion legislation pass while he's on watch. Harper doesn't give a damn about a woman who has been "coerced" into ending her pregnancy.

Harper has to go.

Um. OK. (I don't think Cecilia understands the proper use of sarcasm/scare quotation marks. But then, there's sooo much she doesn't understand, isn't there?)

Next, the reality-challenged ideologue, represented here by our old pal Mr Kicking Abortion's Ass/Sock-Tube Holocaust Survivor, Pacheco:

In my opinion, we are putting too much emphasis on what Harper thinks.

Politicians don't lead, they react and follow. So why take what they say too seriously?

Harper will bend when the underlying politics of the question go against him. And that is going to come with time. Harper is a passing leader. He won't be the guy who has to really face this issue. It will be the next leader.

I swear that I have never heard the phrase "this debate is over" by so many of our opponents. It's quite comical, not unlike the "unqualified support" management gives to a hockey coach before he gets the boot.

Besides, the otherside is confusing the numbers with political will. They are assuming that one correlates with the other. The fact is that the one-third who are pro-life have more gravitas than the weak kneed pro-aborts. Believe me, if the momentum shifts significantly, many of the so-called "women's right to choose" brigade will go silent when the politics of the question shift. Don't kid yourself. The key is in the momentum.

As the momentum shifts so do politicians. Very few are principled. And frankly, we have more principled pro-life politicians in power than we do "principled" pro-aborters. And that's the key factor here.

So not worry, the march for life continues with or without Harper who will still have to give a full accounting to God for his actions -- some of that "accountability" he likes to talk about -- except this kind of accountability has eternal consequences.

So, the anti-abortioneers have 'principles', time, and Gord on their side, while we 'pro-aborts' have only superior numbers of sane people. OK, works for me. (Pacheco does understand the correct use of quotation marks.)

Then there's yesterday's example: the once-hopeful now totally pissed-off, as represented by my Facebook friend Connie.

The ideologues are useless to DJ!'s evul scheme to divide the right. We'll just have to wait for them to die off.

But maybe we can work with the dimbulbs and the pissed-off.

I'm thinking a concerted chorus of 'nyah-nyah -- how's that "Waiting on a Majority Thingy" working out for ya?' might help our cause.

No one likes to be mocked, of course, but it may work differently on the two groups. The emotional dimbulbs might get whipped out of shape enough to vote for the far-far-right christianist parties. Whereas the pissed-off may just become cripplingly depressed over their painful and embarrassing realization of being strung along for so long and stay home.

Now, we at DJ! would never ever suggest trolling of any kind, but a good place to er, gauge how the Mock the Right Campaign is going over might be this Facebook group, Canadian So Cons. From the info page:

We are constantly told that Canada is a socially liberal country, and that social conservatives do not have a place in the public square.

Well, they sure do! Membership in the group numbers a whopping 21! Including many of our fave fetus fetishists like SUZY ALL-CAPS.

Another place to um, monitor reaction might be Bruinooge's Facebook group set up to support his 'coerced abortion' private member's bill.

Mock the Right! It's fun and it might actually do some good!

UPDATE: The conversation at the Freaks continues. Our evul plan is working!

Taxing Abortion

We all know that so-cons are great haters. They hate the feminazis, the homoseckuals, the secularists, etc. etc.

But what do they hate the absolute worstest?

Taxes.

So, putting two simple thoughts together, a state senator in -- where else? -- Kansas wants to tax abortion.

[Mary Pilcher Cook] noted that governments routinely use tax policy to effect [sic] behavior – cigarette and liquor taxes, for example, or tax breaks designed to spur economic activity.

“If you want less of something, you tax it,” Pilcher Cook said.

Several Senators liked the idea. Sen. Susan Wagle, a Wichita Republican, said it would not only reduce abortions, it might also convince another late-term abortion provider from setting up shop in Kansas now that George Tiller’s clinic is closed.

Most resisted the idea, though no critics voiced opposition to the abortion tax. Instead, they argued against reducing the overall sales tax increase.

Pilcher Cook’s amendment failed 17-22.

In the comments there, some (sane) people doubt whether a sales tax on abortion would actually deter women. One genius pipes up that that would depend on the tax rate. He says:

I'd make it 700%. That'd send 'em up to Iowa, huh?

Hm. That reminds me of someone else. Oh yeah, Mr Kicking Abortion's Ass proposing a 500% tax on contraception to make the 'sterile' pay for their future entitlements.

So, big loss for the fetus fetishists?

Seems not.

The fetus fetishist reasons thus:

. . . I think taxing it is a pretty horrible idea.

When you tax something, especially targeting something specific, it creates a revenue stream that politicians get addicted to – thus making the object of your taxation harder to eliminate.

Taxing something also gives it legitimacy in the eyes of many. Even objects that fall under the so-called category of “sin taxes” have this legitimacy – almost as if being taxed gives you government approval.

Politicians would like the munny and the people would get the idea that abortion is, you know, OK.

Let's do it! Tax abortion! Tax marijuana! Tax equal marriage! Tax clear thinking!

All right, I'm getting carried away. . .

Update on the Stringing Fetus Fetishists Along Bill

The Stringing Fetus Fetishists Along Bill is NOT about abortion, right? Let's hear again from Rod Bruinooge on the matter:

Bruinooge insists he’s not trying to push the Commons into a debate the Prime Minister has specifically banned, arguing that nothing in his bill would make it illegal to obtain an abortion.

“This bill doesn’t affect gestational limits or access to abortion in Canada,” Bruinooge told reporters Thursday morning. “It’s something that in fact doesn’t reopen the abortion debate but it does make it a crime to threaten or intimidate a woman into abortion.”

Now let's hear from Mr Kicking Abortion's Ass: Dern tootin'! It is ALL about abortion.

For all the fans of “Kicking Abortion’s Ass” Alert: Abortion.is.going.to.die.in.Canada.

You watch. It’s gonna happen. Not now, but in our lifetimes. It’s something for you to look forward to.

See the problem of whistling to your cretinous followers, Rod? They know what the bill is about but they won't toe the party line and keep their gaping maws shut. Oh, and that 'in our lifetimes' bit? Not bloody likely, according to a poll released today indicating that young Canadians are more abortion- and gay-marriage-loving than ever.

Meanwhile, membership is growing at the new Faytene-free Facebook group, while the wall there is strangely moribund. They seem to be allowing hardcore fetus fetishists again, including Mr KBA -- using his real name, John Pacheco -- and whackjob Bill Whatcott, who writes:

I should also add brutal and premeditated murders like this one, strengthen my belief in the efficacy of capital punishment.

Odd, innit? Fetus-fetishizing and outlaw-lynching so often go together.

And there's a new feature at the website, Share Your Story.

Since the launch of Roxanne's Law we have come to discover that women being coerced against their will to have an unwanted abortion is very common. Many women and men have been coming forward to share their stories. This is your chance as well. By sharing your story you can make something good come out of a horrible experience. Sharing your story will strengthen the argument for Roxanne's Law and help ensure that a woman's right to choose to keep her baby is protected.

Please write your story in 800 words or less and e-mail it to us at contact @ roxanneslaw.ca.

Thank you for your courage.

This will no doubt elicit some creative -- if nearly illiterate -- glurge.

And to round out today's coverage of the Stringing Fetus Fetishists Along Bill, the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada today issued a media release*.

Pro-Choice Group Calls for Law Banning Coerced Childbirth
NATIONAL – A bill recently introduced by a Conservative MP to criminalize “coercing” a woman into abortion should be scuttled in favour of a bill prohibiting the much more common practice of coercing a woman into childbirth, says the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada (ARCC), a national pro-choice group.

“It’s wrong to pressure women into an abortion, but this does not occur on the grand scale often claimed by anti-choice propagandists. It mostly stems from situations of domestic abuse,” said Joyce Arthur, Coordinator of ARCC. Arthur pointed to a recent U.S. study that examined reproductive control of women by abusive male partners. “Some were pressured to have an abortion, but women also reported that their partners prevented them from obtaining or using birth control, threatened them with pregnancy, or forced unprotected sex on them. If they became pregnant and wanted an abortion, some partners threatened or pressured them to carry to term.”

In 1989, Chantal Daigle of Quebec had to travel to the U.S. for an abortion after her boyfriend got an injunction preventing her from having an abortion. Canada’s Supreme Court subsequently ruled that male partners cannot force a woman to have a baby.

“It’s not just partners or family members who try to compel women and girls to have babies against their will,” said Arthur. “The entire anti-choice movement has been trying to force women into pregnancy and motherhood for decades, by working to outlaw or restrict abortion. Perhaps we need to protect women from this coercion by criminalizing anti-choice activism!”

Hee. Wouldn't that be fun? Call the cops! SUZY ALL-CAPS is posting fetal pr0n again!


*You can download a pdf of the whole thing, including references, here.

My Bad?

Those hapless fetus fetishists. Remember when Ken Epp was yelping all over the place that his private member's bill, C-484, had zip zero nada to do with abortion and his lie was abruptly and definitively shot to shit by the big-mouthed blogger subsequently dubbed Mr Kicking Abortion's Ass?

It seems that Rod Bruinooge's current backdoor attempt to restrict abortion, aka Roxanne's Law, has just had its very own Kicking Abortion's Ass moment.

And I may be responsible for it.

Yesterday, I blogged about the bill and included a link to its inevitable Facebook page and my intention to join to ask questions.

I did and my question was deleted, so I unjoined. Others reported that all critical and/or pro-choice comments were being deleted. Fine.

I didn't keep a copy of the question -- my first bad -- but it was along the lines of: 'I'm getting flashbacks to C-484 which was also not atall atall about abortion except all its supporters knew it was. If this new bill is not atall atall about abortion, why are all Canada's most famous fetus fetishists joining this group, starting with Faytene Krystow as administrator?'

I did not mention in my comment that I had noted Canada's maddest homophobe and fetus fetishist, Bill Whatcott, was also a member.

Sometime yesterday or last night, as reported by Bene Diction Blogs On's Rick Hiebert and BeneD, the group disappeared.

When I last looked before it hit the black hole, there were almost 300 members and lots of comments on the wall.

Well, now it's back, whittled down to only 99 members and three comments.

Oooh, and Faytene is no longer administrator. Just Bruinooge is listed as 'creator'. I bet he likes that. ;) Faytene is not even a member.

The members list has been purged. No more Bill and no other notable fetus fetishist that I recognize anyway.

Did they twig? Did I help? My bad?

Bruinooge's Bill Divides the Right

In DJ!'s ongoing effort to divide the right, Bruinooge's private member's bill, C-510, or the Stringing the Fetus Fetishists Along Bill (OK, it's not as good as Kicking Abortion's Ass Bill, but we're working on it) may be a boon.

Let's have a look at what the so-conned are saying.

First, LifeShite appears to think that if they keep asking the same question, they'll get an answer they like.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper's spokesman, Dimitri Soudas, refused today to say whether the PM would allow a free vote in his party on the recently-tabled private members bill from Conservative MP Rod Bruinooge that seeks to protect women from coercive abortions.

Asked by LifeSiteNews (LSN) whether there would be a free vote, Soudas responded that “the government's policy is that we will not initiate or support legislation that reopens the debate on abortion.”

“That's been the consistent policy of this government and this Prime Minister since he took the position and since he was leader of the opposition,” he added. “The government will not be supporting this piece of legislation.”

Asked again, Soudas reiterated, “Like I said, the government will not be supporting this piece of legislation because we do not support reopening the debate on abortion.”

LSN asked “So that means no [free vote]?” and Soudas said again: “The government will not be supporting this piece of legislation.”

Over at Catholic Insight, famous frothing fetus fetishist, Alphonse de Valk, has really got his panties in a twist:

We already know that under Marxist/atheist Gilles Duceppe the Bloc Quebecois is unfit to govern. The New Democratic Party has long since earned the title The New Death Party because of its 45-year-long commitment to killing babies. The Green Party is all in favour of reducing the earth’s population one way or another. The Liberal party under agnostics Ignatieff, Rae and Dion is set to kill as many babies as possible, preferably in Africa and Asia, while carrying on the Trudeau tradition at home. That party still has three or four MP’s who think otherwise but they are locked into the wrong party.

That leaves the Conservatives whose pro-life members must get ready to rise up against Stephen Harper.

Oooh, rise up! Against Stephen Harper! Yay!

No Apologies got the same answer from different spokesthingy, with an added kicker (emphasis mine):

The Prime Minister’s Office was quick, however, to squelch any thought Bruinooge’s bill might be acceptable. “The government will not support the bill,” Harper spokesman Andrew MacDougall said in an interview. “Our Conservative government will not initiate or support any legislation that opens the abortion debate.”

(snip)

MacDougall said the government would demonstrate its opposition at the time of any vote by having cabinet ministers vote against it.

Obviously, the only choice (snerk) left for rabid fetus fetishists is the Christian Heritage Party and they've got ambitions!

Christian Heritage Party leader eyes Tory votes
The Christian Heritage Party (CHP) is hoping be to the Tories what the Green party has been to the Grits.

CHP Leader Jim Hnatiuk believes the Greens on the left have siphoned votes from the Liberals in the last couple of federal elections — and his party intends to mirror that success on the right against the Conservatives.

To get the ball rolling on the monumental task, Hnatiuk is on a Western tour that stops in Kamloops on Saturday, April 17.

Hey, they got nowhere to go but up -- from 0.19% of the popular vote last two times out.

And who wouldn't want to vote for a party whose (albeit unofficial) colour is -- wait for it -- PUCE? (I just looked 'puce' up to be sure. Yup, means 'flea-coloured'.)


ADDED BONUS: Go read pale at A Creative Revolution.

MORE BONUS: Online poll. Link supplied by Roddy himself at the FB page. You know what to do.

"Bring in the wedges, boys, and drive them hard."

Yet another revolting quote from the odious Mr 'Kicking Abortion's Ass', The Fetus©™ fetishizing, christofascist John "Sperm Holocaust" Pacheco.

The story of Roxanne Fernando (the woman whose beating and murder - claimed by Rod Bruinooge to have inspired his private member's bill) is one that's familiar to feminists who led the fight to reform institutions and laws in order to protect battered women and their children from violent domestic partners.

And now the abortion criminalizers are playing this "opportunity", also known as the circumstances that led to the brutal slaying of Fernando, to re-introduce another bill to limit choice.

Notice how Harper's Con jobs never demand better laws to defend the right to safety and the right to life for women like Joan Paget and Gail Saltel as well as their children? Strange how ReformaTories do not vigorously support shelters for the hundreds of Canadian women and children whose kidneys as well as their lives are not valued by rightwing, patriarcal religious zealots.


Un grand merci to JJ, who provided the link to the FD thread and to the venal 'Paycheck' comment, typical of a certain kind of rightwing religious zealot male.

Stringing the Fetus Fetishists Along. . . Still

Oy. Here we go again.

Winnipeg South MP Rod Bruinooge introduced a new bill in the House of Commons on Wednesday, aimed at protecting pregnant women against abortion intimidation.

Yes. That Rod Bruinooge (isn't Open Parliament nifty?), chair of the secretive pro-lie parliamentary caucus and staunch defender of kidneys fetuses.

"The bottom line is that people like myself are not going to stop until, at the very least, unborn children have more value than a Canadian kidney."

Also, don't forget, brother of the MASSIVE Morgentaler poll fraudster.

As Joyce Arthur says at the Winnipeg Free Press link above,

"They're trying to intimidate and scare abortion providers," she said. "Providers could find themselves facing prosecution for coercing abortion."

Arthur maintains the bill steps on the toes of a successful system that's already in place and undermines the good work pregnancy support groups do. Counsellors at clinics are on the front-lines educating people on the rights of the woman, outlining the choices they have and how the decision to see the pregnancy to term is theirs and theirs alone.

"It's a solution looking for a problem that doesn't really exist," Arthur said. "Typically, women who are coerced into having an abortion are already caught at the counselling stage."

The geniuses at Freak Dominion are sneering at it as 'incrementalism', which is exactly what it is of course, and are predicting that it will go nowhere.

Especially since the ever-truthful Stevie Peevie is on record saying that his government would not support any private member's bill to do with abortion.

In other news of that non-debate we're having about abortion, remember the ReformaTories demanded new legislation at their grassrootsy convention to replace C-484, aka Kicking Abortion's Ass Bill?

How's that coming along?

Not so well.

More than 18 months after he pledged to crack down on those who assault pregnant women, Justice Minister Rob Nicholson has yet to keep his promise and won’t say when he will.

Speaking to reporters, Nicholson dismissed suggestions he has shelved his plans. However, he refused repeatedly to say when he will table a bill or even whether he will act within the coming year.

(snip)

Opposition critics Dominic Leblanc and Joe Comartin say it is a “cynical” ploy to satisfy Conservative supporters by promising legislation while at the same time avoiding a potentially explosive debate over a bill some say could restrict abortions.

Cynical? Say it ain't so!

But, hey, it seems to be working. The moronic fetus fetishists keep voting for them. And the rest of us will keep them in minority -- or, hopefully, miniscule opposition -- forever. Because we know Stephen Harper cannot be trusted.

Fucking Liberals

So there I was, having a quite pleasant day, happily anticipating the Liberal abortion gotcha -- backed by the NDP and the Bloc -- designed to force the TheoCons to show their true colours over family planning and women's rights.

Earlier, after an 'emergency' caucus meeting, the ReformaTories had come up with an absolutely brilliant counter to it -- the motion is 'anti-American'.

No. Really. They went with that. I was laffing my ass off all over the Intertoobz.

I was enjoying the witty comments at the various sites that reported the Cons' genius move.

Like this one from the Globe site:

I suppose its Anti semitic as well.

The Freaks were exercised too -- always fun to watch.

The CBC's Question of the Day was: Should access to safe abortion be part of a maternal health plan? The sane answer to that was doing very well indeed.

And, extra bonus! Kady was going to liveblog the latter part of the debate and the vote.

I mean, it was a no-brainer, done deal, all the Opposition would vote for it and the Cons would look like ijits. Poifect! Non-binding but at least Canada wouldn't look quite so stooooopid on the world stage.

Well. If you haven't heard yet, the MOTION WAS DEFEATED.

BY THE FUCKING HARPER LIBERALS, to wit, Dan McTeague, Paul Szabo, and John McKay, who voted with the TheoCons against family planning.

Yes, indeedy, in the 21st century, there are people who have the gall to call themselves Liberals and yet vote against their party in order to tell the wimmins -- yet again -- what we can do with our lady parts.

Two other Harper Liberals -- Albina Guarnieri and Gurbax Malhi -- abstained.

And here's Kady on the other Liberal no-shows:

Curiously absent from the Chamber, despite having been there just a few moments earlier: Derek Lee.

Other Liberal absences, some of whom, at least, were simply not in Ottawa and would almost certainly have supported the motion had they been around, from a list provided by the ever helpful PMO: Anita Neville, Gerard Kennedy, Andrew Kania, Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Alan Tonks, Marlene Jennings, Joe Volpe, Lawrence MacAuley, Stephane Dion, Mario Silva (paired with B. Calkins), Jim Karygiannis.

Just when I was developing a smidge of respect for the Liberals. . .

Just when I was not quite so despairing of Opposition cooperation . . .

Well. That shows me, I guess. Women's rights, here as in the Excited States, are always negotiable. At least for Liberals.

Here is Sister Pale's take complete with a reminder of where that other great Liberal leader, Stéphane Dion, was when another assault on women's rights was passing second reading. When the Kicking Abortion's Ass Bill was being voted on, Dion was absent, eating little pink hamburgers in celebration of -- are you ready for it? -- International Women's Day.

Ah well. As the Liberal boyos are saying today, 'no big diff'.

You look like absolute, complete idiots, Liberals. You couldn't organize a piss-up in a brewery. And the Cons are crapping their pants laughing at you.

You deserve every snide snigger and gloating guffaw.

Fun with YouTube

On a cold, rainy day, Stevie's YouTube stunt is providing some serious giggles.

'Getting down wit da yout' is turning out to be an irresistible opportunity to slam Harper and gang. And many of my fellow Canadians are very witty about it.

But many of them are not very polite. Alison at Creekside has a post about the questions, with some choice samples. My fave so far is 'WHAT'S YOUR HAIR MADE OF?'

Of course, there are serious questions too. And some hobby-horse riding.

Our pal, Mr Kicking Abortion's Ass, explains at the Freaks.

The questions -- about 1500 at the moment -- are searchable by keyword. Search, then vote the ones you like up and the others down. You can also flag questions as inappropriate. * evul smiley *

I just did 'abortion' and 'women'. I'm about to go back for 'Afghan' and 'detainee'.

While lefty-libtard-feminazi questions seem to attract a lot of thumbs down, there are remarkably few Con-friendly questions. They can click but they can't come up with softball questions?

Go. Giggle.

Sterility Tax

Now this is a genius idea from one of our fave fetus fetishists, Mr Kicking Abortion's Ass.

No children? No work force. Unsustainable social programs. Economic collapse.

It’s time for Western goverments to consider a sterility tax for all of the free-loaders who expect “the government” to pay for their entitlements without the necessary workforce to support those entitlements.

I say…

500% tax on contraceptives.

Major tax incentives for families who have many children. The more children you have, the less tax you pay. A future workforce, after all, is essential to the growth and continued existence of the State.

Sterilization and masturbation, we are finding out, have their own social and economic costs. And they are not unsubstantial.

Even some of the Freaks think it's a bad idea.

And what about teh Gays? They don't need no steenking contraception. How are they going to pay for their 'entitlements' in this new Republic of Gilead?

Mr KAA may be a good Catlick truly concerned for the souls of us sterile heathens, but I'm thinking he may be more than a little motivated by this report today from StatsCan.

About one-third of Canada's population -- or 14.4 million people -- will be a visible minority within three decades, Statistics Canada projects -- that's more than double the 5.3 million visible minorities counted in 2006.

(snip)

The percentage of foreign-born people in Canada is projected to grow about four times faster than the rest of the population between now and 2031. That would mean the total proportion of foreign-born people would account for between 25 and 28 per cent of Canada's population, or up to 12.5 million.

Me, I don't care who pays for my entitlements or what colour their skin is. Other people, it seems, do.

No Family Planning, No Contraception, No Abortion = Maternal Health, Public Version

What was behind the subscription wall at Embassy Magazine is now publicly available.

That great friend of women and limousine-hopper, Bev Oda confirms: No abortion or contraception for developing countries because our fundy base wouldn't like it, unless the racists thought about it and then they might.

The federal government won’t add contraception and abortion to a package of initiatives aimed at improving women and children’s health despite pleas from the Opposition to include the practices.

International Co-operation Minister Bev Oda said Thursday that Ottawa isn’t changing its policy on what measures will be part of a major initiative with G8 countries to improve the lot of women and children in the world’s poorest countries.

“Canada is not currently going to be changing its approach to improving maternal and infant health,” Ms. Oda said in Halifax, where she announced the port city will host a G8 development ministers meeting in April.

Ah, but, you see, that's a great big porky pie. Canada -- under the ReformaTories -- is changing 30 years of foreign aid policy that, in consultation with the receiving country of course, did include the full range of reproductive services for women and men.

Now, have a gander at this swerve:

“The Prime Minister has been clear since we became government that there’s no intention on regenerating any debate on abortion.”

That is true -- but only for Canada. And he had to say that when Ken Epp's private member's bill, aka the Kicking Abortion's Ass Bill, was about to bite the Cons on the butt before it was tossed under the bus just before the last -- or was it the one before that? I'm losing count here -- election.

(Read the comments at the Globe link -- over 450 when I was there. Just about universally appalled.)

Now, go read Joyce Arthur who has a slew of facty-truthy thingies about how hellyeah access to safe abortion is an integral part of maternal health.

Conservative politicians and commentators have heaped scorn on Ignatieff's concerns, however, and condemned him for turning women's health into a "political football." But most of the politicking is actually coming from Ignatieff's critics, who have launched attacks without the benefit of any facts, and even less compassion for women. Some of the coverage is so shockingly ignorant that it qualifies as being misogynist. Please, if we are going to have this discussion — and we should — please, let's pay attention to some key facts:

* 19-20 million women in developing countries resort to unsafe (usually illegal) abortions every year. 98% of unsafe abortions occur in countries with restrictive abortion laws (generally archaic laws passed by former colonial powers). There are 42 million abortions a year in total.

* 68,000 women die every year from unsafe abortion. 8 million women experience complications serious enough to require treatment. Of those, 3 million never receive medical treatment.

* Thirteen percent of all pregnancy-related deaths are due to unsafe abortion.

* Unsafe abortion is the only cause of maternal mortality that is entirely preventable.

* The highest abortion rates in the world are generally in developing countries with strict criminal laws against abortion. Laws don't stop abortion; they only drive it underground and make it dangerous. (Abortion rates are lower and have been declining in countries where it is legal and widely available.)

* 220,000 children worldwide lose their mothers every year from abortion-related deaths. (Most women in the developing world who have abortions are married with children.)

* When a pregnant woman dies from unsafe abortion, her existing children are 10 times more likely to die within the next two years.

* 215 million women in the developing world have an unmet need for modern contraceptives (meaning they want to avoid a pregnancy but are using an ineffective family planning method or no method).

* Lack of contraception contributes to high rates of unintended pregnancy, which in turn contributes significantly to the maternal death rate. That's because childbirth is dangerous in many developing countries. For example, the lifetime risk of maternal death is 1 in 17 in West and Central Africa, and 1 in 8000 in industrialized countries.

* Additional consequences of unsafe abortion include loss of productivity, economic burden on public health systems, stigma, and long-term health problems like infertility.

* The costs of treating the 5 million women who are hospitalized every year after unsafe abortion is at least $460 million. In Africa, complications of abortion account for 30 to 50 percent of maternal deaths, and hospitals' maternity wards and budgets are often largely diverted to treating these complications.

* Safe legal abortion saves women's lives. Without exception, every country that has legalized abortion has seen dramatic decreases in deaths and serious complications due to unsafe abortion. In western industrialized countries, death from unsafe abortion has been virtually eliminated.

Let's hear from somebody else who knows a thing or two, Keith Martin.

Liberal MP Keith Martin, a doctor who is an expert on the sorry state of maternal health around the world, is one of those supporters. Martin has travelled to Africa dozens of times, and worked there as a doctor several times. He has also been involved in previous attempts to get the G8 to take strong action on improving maternal mortality. He has chaired pre-G8 summits on international health, including maternal and childhood mortality.

Martin says the federal government must articulate exactly what it is going to do when it comes to the G8 maternal health initiative and access to reproductive technology. "I hope they don't take an ideological position."

Harper will be "turning back the clock," Martin says, if the initiative does not include reproductive health: "I can't think of another country that would take that position."

Yeah, well, the Excited States went down that foreign policy abstinence only and screw people vulnerable to AIDS road under the influence of their ChristoTalibaners. And now Motherhood Steve is taking up that slack now that grown-ups are in charge in Washington.

So, I say again: Yo, Iggy, Jack! Ride this horsey!

That Abortion Debate? Bring It On!

Seriously. I'm having too much fun with Iggy's Abortion Gambit/Gauntlet/Grenade.

First, cast your minds back to the brouhaha over Ken Epp's private member's bill, C-484, or as we followed one of its proponents in calling it, The Kicking Abortion's Ass Bill.

Back then, people with more than one functioning neuron saw it -- as its supporters did, despite the mewling of Ken Epp et al. -- as a sneaky, backdoor attempt to open the abortion so-called debate with the aim of restricting and ultimately outlawing abortion.

We, the sane people, said: 'NO. We are not debating women's rights.'

Well, many pundits -- I'm too lazy to go back and find all the links but you know who and where they are -- opined: 'We need to reopen the debate.'

To which, we, the sane people, said: 'FUCK the debate.'

Welly-well-well.

Look who's saying FUCK the debate now.Lorrie Fucking Goldstein in the Toronto Fucking Sun:

Is this really what Ignatieff wants pre-occupying Parliament when it resumes? To roll back the clock and reignite the debate over abortion?

Hee. What's that acronym floating around these days? Something like: IOKIYAADSHA -- it's OK if you are a desperately spinning Harpocon apologist.

Hey, So-Cons! Listen Up!

Just like the National Rethuglicans in the US, the Conservatard Party of Canada continues to pander to so-cons without ever doing anything about their pet projects.

But at least Stephen Harper is upfront about his lack of interest in abortion.

“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.”

Last time around though, he left the door open to private members' bills, like the infamous Kicking Abortion's Ass Bill, aka Ken Epp's C-484.

Not anymore.

After Monday's event, however, Mr. Harper's spokesman Kory Teneycke clarified in an e-mail to The Globe and Mail that Mr. Harper would tell his cabinet ministers they could not support any private member's bills that could reopen the debate.

“We can't prevent private member's bills from reaching the floor,” Mr. Teneycke said, “But the government would not support them.”

So-cons should give up on the Conservatards already and vote for the only party that truly represents their misogynist, homophobic, Christian Taliban values -- the Christian Heritage Party.

Just think how comfy so-cons would be with this bunch of losers.