Friday, 16 April 2010

'Coerced Abortion': A Whole New Branch of Lying Lies

Having run into what seemed to me totally bogus numbers on the frequency of 'coerced abortion', I just spent a fascinating couple of hours discovering an entirely new (to me) branch of lying lies fetus fetishists tell -- many blogposts to come.

But for now, let's deal with Lie Number One. It's right there in the preamble to Rod Bruinooge's private member's bill, C-510, or Roxanne's Law.
Whereas Roxanne Fernando was a Winnipeg woman whose boyfriend attempted to coerce her to abort their unborn child and subsequently murdered her for refusing to do so;

That's just a great big porky pie.

At the sentencing of her murderers, the lawyer for one of the convicted men rejected that motive.
Fernando had learned she was pregnant with Plourde's child weeks before her death, court heard in the teen's case. In the youth's case the court heard her murder was planned because she refused to have an abortion, but Plourde's lawyer told the court today that the pregnancy had nothing to do with the offence.

Well, he would say that, wouldn't he? Because killing someone who had refused herself to kill a defenceless bay-bee is just so much worse, isn't it? And defence counsel has a duty to mitigate the gravity of his client's crime, right? And the prosecution has just as much interest in making the crime sound most heinous, yes?

Oh. Wait.
In a brief summary of the facts of the murder presented in court Thursday, Crown attorney Mark Cantor said Plourde and the youth hatched a plot to kill Fernando if she wouldn't agree to break off pursuing a relationship with Plourde.
The abortion-refusal motive seems to have gone bye-bye.

So why was Roxanne killed?

Let's hear from the murderer himself:
“I didn’t want to be part of her life, but she didn’t take no for an answer,” Plourde told Winnipeg police homicide detectives in a February 2007 videotaped confession. “She was crazy about me. She had an obsession with me. I just couldn’t take it. Like, I’m 19. I can’t handle a 24-year-old.”

Plourde said he was facing additional pressure after learning Fernando was pregnant, a claim he initially thought was a ruse to keep them together following a brief romance that began while working together at McDonald’s.

“In my fears, she’ll come back in nine months with a kid or something,” he said. “I don’t understand why she liked me because I didn’t like her. I’m just a young punk. I showed no interest in her.”

During last year’s sentencing for a youth co-accused, Crown attorney Brent Davidson told court Plourde pressured Fernando to have an abortion. Fernando initially agreed, but later had a “change of heart.” Plourde admitted to police the pair discussed an abortion, but denied telling Fernando what to do.

Young murderous punk, yes. Evil abortion-coercer, maybe not.

But, hey, it's great optics. A law named after a victim is good P.R. Nemmind that it's -- at best -- a streeeeetch of the truth.

Roxanne's Law has a website and the inevitable Facebook group

All the usual fetus fetishists are at FB, including Faytene Kryskow as administrator (who knew there is a wikichristian?). Faytene is famous among zygot zealots for collecting signatures on a MASSIVE petition to revoke Dr Morgentaler's Order of Canada. She also seems to have something of a love-hate relationship with the media.

I've joined the group to ask some questions. *evil smiley*

h/t for the links

UPPITY DATE: Faytene deleted my question. Awwww, shucks. No truth allowed there, I guess.


SustainableFamilies said...

You know this is something I have thought about a lot. I have some good friends who felt pressured into abortion and it was really hard for them. Considering law makers are actually concerned about STOPPING ABORTION and not about WOMEN'S HEALTH, it's impossible to really know research wise how abortion actually affects women. Most research I've heard has an obvious bias.

That being said, most all of my friends have had abortions... (all but one of my 10 closest friends?) and all of them have talked about it in very emotional terms and wound up crying about it when talking about it.

I am very pro-choice... but I also get concerned that sometimes the reality that women can have a hard time with abortion gets thrown into the debate... when it should NOT be used that way.

Women should be able to say how they feel about past abortions without it being used as fuel for or against legalizing choice.

Choice should be there. Period.

Whether or not some women wanted to parent but felt pushed into abortion due to financial concerns, coercion by friends and family? Well I think that happens pretty often. After all what are family/acquaintances/people you thought were your friends for other than to shove their opinions down your throat when you're struggling?

When I experienced a unplanned teen pregnancy, I went to planned parenthood and the woman stared at me like a total freak when I asked if they had any support services for parenting. The woman said, "Well you can have an abortion"

I didn't want to have an abortion. She said they had nothing else to offer.

While I believe that a woman's choice should be deeply respected... I found that people who were pro-choice REALLY wanted to push me into abortion.

I have never pushed a woman who wants to keep to abort, nor a woman who wants to abort to keep.

Neither should be ok.

I don't know that there is anything the law can due or SHOULD do to change what peers or romantic partners or family have to say, or whatever pressures they put on.

But I would like, in my imagined utopia, for crisis pregnancy services to basically first ask a woman if she could have her DREAM situation... if she had support, resources, emotional support, financial support... would she want to parent? And if so, I would like for her to be offered all known parenting resources in the area.

Likewise. If she says there is no way, this is not what I want right now, abortion services would be offered compassionately and quickly (and affordably.)

Is it such a utopian dream? Sigh.

Politics'n'Poetry said...

What the fucking hell are these woman-haters up to now? Another dog-whistle to the base, for sure! And the lies -- holy fuck, these fuckwads gotta go! Sooner, rather than later!!!

Think the Iggster's gonna use this to score points? At this point, I'll take any fucking little thing to force an election already. It is long past time to rid ourselves of the most rightwing fucking government we have ever known in this country!

Anonymous said...

The 'official' Facebook page has been deleted.

Bene D

fern hill said...

Bene D: Probably got too tedious deleting all comments that were critical, questioning, factual or otherwise objectionable to them.

fern hill said...

The Facebook group seems to be back, now with only 99 members and two comments. When I last looked yesterday, there were almost 300 members and lots of comments. FB glitch? Selective editing? I got there by clicking the FB icon here.

fern hill said...

Oooh, and notorious fetus fetishist Faytene is no longer administrator. Just Bruinooge is listed as 'creator'. I bet he likes that. ;)

Maybe I shouldn't have pointed out that all the usual fetus fetishists, starting with Faytene herself, seemed to be there in my comment that was pretty snappily deleted. And, like, what's up with that if this bill has nothing to do atall atall with recriminalizing abortion?

My bad.

JJ said...

fern hill - Are you going to join? I think we all should :p

fern hill said...

Sure, I will if you will.

Rick Hiebert said...

Hi Fern,

Although I have written what might be a "Bizarro World" version of your post :) . I found your post very helpful. Thanks very much.

You would be perhaps be one of those who see this all as cyncial bosh? :)

fern hill said...

Hi, Rick. We live to serve here. ;)

I commented at your place.

freewomansholyinheritance said...

I believe coercion to continue a pregnancy occurs FAR more often than coercion to terminate.

Post a Comment