Showing posts with label ARPA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ARPA. Show all posts

Saturday, 11 August 2018

Lawless Abortion: No, We Do Not Need a Law



We Need a Law, the astroturf wing of Dominionist group Association for Reformed Political Action*, has put up its first billboard in Dartmouth, NS.

No doubt to the group's delight, it is causing controversy.

Pattison Outdoor, which rents the space, says it has received complaints, but will not take it down unless instructed to by Ad Standards.

So, friends of truth and choice, we need to complain. Ad Standards has made this relatively easy.

Go here and read the instructions. There is a handy online form.

For this ad, I think the section of The Code that applies is 1(a) under "Accuracy and Clarity."
In assessing the truthfulness and accuracy of a message, advertising claim or representation under Clause 1 of the Code the concern is not with the intent of the sender or precise legality of the presentation. Rather the focus is on the message, claim or representation as received or perceived, i.e. the general impression conveyed by the advertisement.

(a) Advertisements must not contain, or directly or by implication make, inaccurate, deceptive or otherwise misleading claims, statements, illustrations or representations.
Section 14 "Unacceptable Depictions and Portrayals may also apply and has been successfully used against anti-choice advertising in the past.

Getting back to "Accuracy and Clarity," while technically accurate, the ad has two misleading implications:

1. That there is no regulation of abortion. This is not true. Like all other medical procedures, abortion is regulated by the practitioners, in this case the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada. Here are the guidelines.

2. That patients and providers are doing something wrong or illegal. Also not true. Abortion was decriminalized in 1988. It is a common medical procedure, fully covered by Canada's universal health insurance.

On the second point, Section 14(c) and (d) may apply.
(c) demean, denigrate or disparage one or more identifiable persons, group of persons, firms, organizations, industrial or commercial activities, professions, entities, products or services, or attempt to bring it or them into public contempt or ridicule;
(d) undermine human dignity; or display obvious indifference to, or encourage, gratuitously and without merit, conduct or attitudes that offend the standards of public decency prevailing among a significant segment of the population.

Let's do this. We Need a Law (Like a Hole in the Head) plans to put up 70 of these billboards across Canada.

Complain. Complaining works.

(Note: The online form takes a while to load. It's not loading for me at all, so I'm going to email. info @ adstandards.com)

ADDED: ARCC also has a guide to lodging complaints with Ad Standards.


*I've written about ARPA a lot. It is a political action group devoted to imposing Christian theocracy.

The mission of ARPA Canada is to educate, equip, and encourage Reformed Christians to political action and to bring a biblical perspective to our civil authorities.
They lobby the hell out of government, meddling in abortion matters, assisted dying, freedom of religion, and other shit that is none of its business.

It is not a benign influence on civic debate.

Tuesday, 19 April 2016

The Death Throes of Pro-Life



Desperate fetus freaks are changing tactics for this year's Futility Fest on the HIll, aka March For Lies.
Campaign Life Coalition has paved the way for every organization fighting for the unborn to take part in this year’s National March for Life May 12.

“We’ve done something very deliberate this year,” said Campaign Life Ottawa lobbyist Johanne Brownrigg. “We have decided to present a unified voice from the entire pro-life movement as far and wide as we could reach.”

Even though Campaign Life, the national political arm of the pro-life movement, remains the sole organizer of the march, the promo video released March 14 includes groups such as WeNeedaLaw.ca*, the Association for Reformed Political Action (ARPA), educational pro-life groups such as LifeCanada, the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops, Priests for Life and 4MYCanada. The promo can be viewed at Marchforlife.ca.
(*NOTE: We Need a Law Like a Hole in the Head is a project of the Dominionist ARPA. For the click-averse, Dominionists want to impose Xian biblical law on all levels of government.)

This is news because the abolitionists (largely Vatican Talibaners) and incrementalists (largely evangelical fundies) do not play well together. I call this the Wingnut Wedgie.

Here's the description of their differences from the top link, a Catlick rag.
Pro-life groups have often been at odds over tactics. For instance, WeNeedaLaw.ca supports incremental legislation that would use a gestational approach to restricting abortion, a tactic Campaign Life has opposed because of its emphasis on protecting life from conception.

“It has been our experience for some time now that if we are going to be successful in advancing legal protections for pre-born children it is necessary for respective pro-life organizations to focus on those things we have in common, rather than on our differences,” said Schouten. “The annual March for Life needs to become more than a stand-alone event. The March for Life affords us a great opportunity to work together to build as much momentum as possible for the following weeks and months.”
Cute, Mike. "Our experience" and "successful" do not belong in the same sentence by a fetus freak about abortion in Canada. You have had ZERO success. And a couple of HUGE losses lately. See PEI and RU486, or Mifegymiso.

And now with the election of the "most pro-abortion prime minister ever" AND the introduction of assisted dying legislation, however patronizing and risk-averse it is, fetus freaks know their movement is dying.

I called it after last year's March for Lies. Anti-choice inflation, the annual outright lying about turn-out, is stalled.

But the movement has ever been marked by delusion and (self-)deception.

Last word to another Dominionist (fixed by me):
ARPA legal counsel Andre Schutten thinks the [frantic] inclusion of his and other organizations in the promotional video is a “sign of healthy growth stagnation and the maturing imminent death of the movement.”

Wednesday, 21 October 2015

Is Our Pro-Lifers Losing? Part II: The "Grassroots" Reaction

First, the bloggers: SUZY ALL-CAPS has been quiet for quite a while. SHE says she's rethinking what SHE wants to do with her blog. Focus on the Family (Canada branch) and Dominionist We Need a Law (Like a Hole in the Head) haven't got their shit together yet, though head Dominionist Mike Schouten makes a reassuring guest video appearance at the amateur statistician's blog.

LieShite, however, is going nuts. There are at least four articles on the evil that is Justin Trudeau and what to expect from our new majority CULTURE OF DEATH government.

This one is titled "Justin Trudeau: ‘bad news' – the evidence."

“Like his father, Justin Trudeau is a left-wing ideologue who wants to remake Canada in his own radical image,” said [Paul] Tuns [editor of Catholic rag "The Interim"], who recently published “The Dauphin: The Truth About Justin Trudeau.”

The Liberal leader will try “to foist upon the country social change that will include expanded abortion, permissive euthanasia, easy access to drugs, and other departures from moral sanity and our cultural tradition, all under the guise of promoting Canadian values and the Charter of Rights,” Tuns predicts.

Moreover, “he’s the most pro-abortion politician I’ve every seen.”
He'll also put a brothel in every Starbuck$.

The article contains the de rigueur photo of papa Pierre with "his friend dictator Fidel Castro."

It garnered only five comments.

Another article though, titled "Pro-lifers lament Justin Trudeau's Liberal sweep" has 41 comments.

A sampling:
I am not pro- or anti- Harper (mostly because I don't have enough information to form any opinion). Many people I know didn't even vote "for" Trudeau, but "against" Harper. They hate Harper with passion, but if you ask them why, they can't really form an answer.

Not providing legal protection for the unborn by Stephen Harper has lost him the election.....God will NOT bless a man or a country that has the blood of so many innocents on its hands-----

Just like George W. Bush, John Harper did poorly for the country, and made conservatives their own worst enemy.

And the one that inspired my blogpost title:
The procentage of people voting for Conservatives in this elections indicate the sad truth about how many Canadians still have brains and is able to use it. Sad, very sad

Continuing DJ's tradition of selfless service to our readers, I spent 15 minutes I'll never get back listening to a "round table" sponsored by Dominionist Association for Reformed Political Action (ARPA).

The participants, including our pal Mike Schouten, are pretty discouraged. Schouten points out that many anti-choicers were losers -- hell, we coulda told him that -- but finds a silver lining in that fetus freak CONs who did get elected will no longer be "muzzled" by that anti-Christ John Harper.

They were also disappointed that medically assisted suicide was not more of a campaign issue and one of them (they were all men, by the way) said that there was "too much" talking about economic issues like taking from the rich and giving to the pesky poor.

The moderator asked if they had any friends left and a few old names were reeled off, plus a new special friend, Arnold Viersen for Peace River-Westlock, who is "the former treasurer of the Barrhead/Neerlandia chapter of the Association of Reformed Political Action."


(I post the pic from the article, mainly because the caption notes that the photo was "supplied," i.e. approved by the candidate, presumably. Doesn't he look like the archetype fetus fetishist?)

Near the end, participants are asked to sum up. Or to quote the questioner: "Where is God going with this?"

They seem to agree that Canadians made a HUGE mistake and will regret it. We Canadians are sadly misguided and mistaken. We are really much more conservative than we realize, apparently. God is gonna smite us for that. (OK, I made that last bit up.)

They also agree they've got their work cut out for them.

And no doubt, many, many more fundraising opportunities in SHRIEEEKING about that Communist, Homo-Enabling, Prostitute-Loving, Death-Cult Leader Trudeau.

We look forward to four or five fun years ahead.

UPDATE (Oct. 22/15): Fetus freaks lick their wounds and helpfully identify the new anti-choicers in the House.


Part I: Is Our Pro-Lifers Losing?

Friday, 24 July 2015

Back to Life, Back from Cambodia?

Canada, a staunchly prochoice country, nonetheless has its equally staunch fetus freaks.

Their cause is hopeless but they keep stomping their little feet and SHRIEEEEKING.

Case in point: the Parental Consent campaign, a co-masturbation between Saskatchewan ProLife and Dominionist ARPA.

They've been told repeatedly that it ain't gonna happen, yet they persist.

One might find this pathetic or even quixotically amusing.

Except.

The campaign continues to disseminate harmful LIES.

Yesterday, it tweeted this statement: "Abortion has a profound impact on adolescent girls," accompanied by this graphic.


There it is again: Parental Consent wants pregnant teens to give up their autonomy to provide someone with a baybeeee.

But they're lying in the process, as I pointed out by replying with this link to a study from 2012.
Getting a legal abortion is much safer than giving birth, suggests a new U.S. study published Monday.

Researchers found that women were about 14 times more likely to die during or after giving birth to a live baby than to die from complications of an abortion.

Experts say the findings, though not unexpected, contradict some state laws that suggest abortions are high-risk procedures.
Explicitly contrary to what Parental Consent would have teens believe -- staying pregnant is 14 times more lethal than choosing abortion.

But what is that website at the bottom of the graphic? I'd never heard of Back to Life Canada.

It's a website created in November 2012 to promote celebrate a bunch of women who walked from here to there to protest abortion.

A little more digging revealed that our old pal Faytene Variable Last Name, most recently Grasseschi, is a prime mover.

Weird group, weird activities.

The website contains the requisite Risks of Abortion page, on which the usual bogus and nauseatingly often debunked claims are made.

Then there's The Walkers, a group of 25 women, first names only, most with pictures, and, oddly, ethnic identities. For example, Chinese Canadian, Anglo Canadian, Metis Canadian, French Canadian, and Barbadian Canadian are listed, but two women who look black are identified as Anglo Canadian, which may describe their language but huh?

(Faytene herself does not appear.)

And they have a Big Field Trip! A project called Back to Life Cambodia.
Back to Life Cambodia is a 2-week event that will focus on prayer, prophetic decrees, seminars, and outreaches to establish value for the life within the minds and hearts of the Cambodian people.

The trip was set for May 17-31, 2015, at a cost of only $500 which does not include accommodation, meals, airfare, travel insurance or Cambodian visa but does include .... ?

The page contains a video report from its inaugural 2014 field trip, but contains nothing from 2015.

I looked and found ... more nothing.

Did they not go? Did they get lost? Did the good people of Cambodia tell them to get stuffed and go home?

Inquiring minds. . .






Tuesday, 5 May 2015

Charter Challenge on Abortion Statistics

I'm kind of surprised there hasn't been a single mainstream media story on this.

So, here goes with my version of an interesting looming conflict over reproductive rights in Ontario.

First, the players. One is amateur statistician and serial shrieeeeker, Pat Maloney. Another is the Dominionist (reluctant) revealer of Conservative leadership candidates' abortion stances, Association for Reformed Political Action with its astroturf stalking horse, We Need a Law Like a Hole in the Head.

The issue: The exemption of abortion statistics from Ontario's Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA).

Background. In January 2012, FIPPA was extended to hospitals with the following exemptions (scroll down to Sec. 65).

(5.7)  This Act does not apply to records relating to the provision of abortion services. 2010, c. 25, s. 24 (17).

Among its many other exemptions, there's also this:
(5.3)  This Act does not apply to the ecclesiastical records of a church or religious organization that is affiliated with an educational institution or a hospital. 2010, c. 25, s. 24 (17).

You know, just to forestall any accusation that the government is PROABORTION and ANTICHRISTIAN!!!

Here's a news story about the abortion exemption from August 2012.
The Ontario government says it recently restricted public access to records of abortion services because the data is “highly sensitive.” The change has prompted criticism from some anti-abortion groups, saying the public’s ability to request abortion data was important because statistics currently released by government entities are “shoddy.”

Asked to explain the decision, the provincial Ministry of Health said in a statement to the National Post: “Records relating to abortion services are highly sensitive and that is why a decision was made to exempt these records.”

B.C. has had a similar clause in its Freedom of Information act since 2001, restricting the disclosure of information relating to abortion services. The change came after several clinics and hospitals in the province were targeted by anti-abortion groups, as well as violence against North American abortion providers, and was intended to protect the providers, said Wendy Norman, an associate professor of family medicine at the University of British Columbia.
At the time, beyond the "highly sensitive" characterization, the purpose of exemption was never made explicit though concerns for the safety of providers and for the non-entirely neutral use of the information were assumed.

The fetus freaks naturally claimed censorship and scurrilous skulduggery.

Pat Maloney, in particular, seemed to be itching for the martyr mantle.
Anti-abortion blogger Patricia Maloney, however, says her latest request was denied.

“Before this change occurred, a citizen of Ontario could ask for and receive information on abortion statistics. I have done several of these Freedom of Information requests,” she wrote on her blog, Run with Life. “In fact it was my latest FOI, which was refused, that alerted me to the change.”
And now she has a partner, ARPA, in her martyr quest. Here is their factum asking that Section 65(5.7) of FIPPA be declared unconstitutional.

First, the spin claim voiced by the usual suspects that this is aaallll about facts and statistics is just too hilarious. Here's the Focus on the Family astroturf gang:
This is not about being pro-life. We need good statistics to see trends in our society and to know whether education programs are working.
Yeah, sure. Pat Maloney, who used aggregated abortion statistics to call for homicide investigations, is aaaalll about stats.

Also, we do not remember any anti-choice organizations among the 488 groups clamouring to keep the mandatory census for the sake of "good stats," though among those eleven in favour of scrapping it was "gendercide hero" Mark Warawa.

And now there's another wrinkle. The Ontario Civil Liberties Association (OCLA) is backing the call for the release of information.

“The exclusion effectively prohibits expression on the excluded records, and thereby violates the Charter right to free expression of the requesters of the information,” said the OCLA position paper. “The OCLA seeks to raise the concern that there is palpable institutional bias against pro-life advocates in Ontario and that this is harmful to society and substantively unjust towards members of the community.”
Bias against "pro-life advocates" seems an odd tack to take, though. (Not to mention the very odd use of the phrase "pro-life" by what one would like to think of as unbiased intervenors.

It seems to us that there is a simple solution. There are grounds for refusal to disclose information under Section 10(1)(b) of FIPPA.

10. (1)   Subject to subsection 69 (2), every person has a right of access to a record or a part of a record in the custody or under the control of an institution unless, (b) the head is of the opinion on reasonable grounds that the request for access is frivolous or vexatious.
Judging from the uses to which fetus freaks have put this kind of information previously, "frivolous" and "vexatious" would both apply.

Finally, if the antis had their way, abortion would be criminalized or at least defunded and then what kind of stats would be available?

None.

Except for skyrocketing death and disability stats from self- or amateur-administered abortion.

As a fan of facts and evidence, DJ! generally supports the release of information, provided the safety of patients and providers is guaranteed.

Like the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada (ARCC), we're not convinced that can achieved by this means.
ARCC supports the release of general statistics on abortion, because that's needed for research purposes and health planning to improve services etc., while posing no risk of identifying individual providers or facilities. The amendment apparently does not prevent that.

BONUS: Most recent Canadian abortion stats (Feb. 2015) from ARCC.



h/t to Joyce Arthur for some help in clarifying my thoughts and for law links

Friday, 20 February 2015

It's Baaaack: Unborn Victims Bill, C484

UPDATE: December 7, 2015
This old blog-post must have been linked to somewhere because it's getting some action in the comments recently. I published a couple as you can see and there are more.

But I've said what I said and have nothing to add. Discuss this elsewhere. I will publish no more comments.

******************************


Here we go again. Another brutal murder of a pregnant woman and people are again braying for vengeance.

Firefighters discovered [Cassandra] Kaake’s body Dec. 11 after she was murdered and mutilated. Kaake, 31, was seven months pregnant. She planned to call the baby Molly.

Police said Kaake died from blood loss caused by severe trauma. The killer also allegedly torched Kaake’s Benjamin Avenue home with her body inside.

Matthew Brush, 26, from LaSalle, is charged with break and enter, arson causing property damage, possession of incendiary material for arson, arson with disregard for human life, first-degree murder and indecent interference with a dead body.
If found guilty, I think it's pretty safe to say that this fella will have the book thrown at him, including a very harsh sentence based on Canada's sensible notion of aggravating circumstances.

From a 2007 Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada Position Paper on "Fetal Homicide" Law (pdf):
In Canada, the judicial system routinely takes aggravating circumstances into account. In the case of an assault or murder of a pregnant woman, even though a third party cannot be charged separately with harm to the fetus, prosecutors may recommend more serious charges (such as first degree murder or aggravated assault), judges may impose harsher penalties, and parole boards may deny parole to convicted perpetrators.

Perhaps we want a new law that codifies such practices. Thirteen U.S. states have laws that simply apply stiffer punishments for murdering a pregnant woman, but do not make the death of the fetus a separate crime. Such a solution would avoid the controversy about giving rights to fetuses or interfering with abortion rights, and would ensure that women do not lose their rights while they are pregnant.
No doubt this has been explained to the grieving family and friends, but is apparently not enough. A woman named Kim Badour started a petition to bring back Ken Epp's ill-fated private member's bill, C484.
The bill would have made it a criminal offence to cause harm to an unborn child during a crime against the mother. It passed second reading in the House of Commons but was later dropped. Badour wants to bring it back.
As the ARCC quote indicates, there are tons of problems with "fetal homicide" laws, however well-intentioned they are. (We do not believe that Epp and other fetus freaks were well-intentioned. We believe they were and are crass anti-choicers preying on the grief and outrage of bereaved families in order to bring in anti-abortion legislation by the infamous back door.)

So what does Official Fetus Freakdom have to say?

Perhaps surprisingly, it is quite clear-eyed and balanced (!!!!) in its response. First the obligatory whine.

[Mary-Ellen]Douglas [spokesperson for Campaign Life Coalition] hopes a pro-life MP will take up Bill C-484 but doesn’t give it much chance of passage. “Harper stopped it the first time,” she said, and there is no reason to believe he won’t do the same again.

But next, a pretty straight account of the other side.
The Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada (ARCC) opposed Bill C-484 then and still does, seeing it as a wolf in sheep’s clothing. While it appeals to all concerned about violence against women, according to ARCC, it really targets women’s “reproductive rights.” ARCC’s Joyce Arthur told LifeSiteNews that 38 U.S. states (and the U.S. federal government) have passed unborn victims laws or other “fetal personhood” measures that have “resulted in hundreds of pregnant women with wanted pregnancies being arrested or prosecuted, or subjected to forced interventions, for behavior perceived as potentially harmful to the fetus.”

Arthur cites a study titled Arrests of and Forced Interventions on Pregnant Women in the United States, 1973–2005: Implications for Women’s Legal Status and Public Health, and further studies by the same researchers, Lynn Paltrow and Jeanne Flavin. They count 780 instances since 1973 (380 of them since 2005) of women jailed or institutionalized by the courts either to get them off drugs during their “wanted” pregnancy or on suspicion they deliberately caused themselves to miscarry, but sometimes when women merely resisted doctors’ wishes that they deliver by caesarean section. 

None of the laws used were intended to jail pregnant women, the researchers report, and about 10 percent of the arrests fell under unborn victims of crime laws.
The piece ends with another obligatory whining flourish.
Mary Ellen Douglas countered, however: “Joyce Arthur and her crowd will do anything to avoid talking about the 4 million unborn children that have been legally aborted in Canada. They can’t face that reality.”
Here's a link to the executive summary of the study Arthur cites. It is a chilling documentation of the criminalization of pregnancy in the US, resulting in arrests, trials, and imprisonment of mostly poor, vulnerable women.

Two recent examples show the gross injustice these laws enable, both cases targetting women of colour: Purvi Patel and Bei Bei Shuai.

But however tragic these cases are -- whether they involve murder, spousal abuse, sustance abuse, or mental health issues -- there will always be the opportunists.

Like Mike Schouten of We Need a Law (Like a Hole in the Head).

It is particularly rich that Schouten with his astroturf organization -- set up by Dominionist Association for Reformed Political Action to jump on "gendercide", or the alleged MASSIVE phenom in "certain" communities of aborting female fetuses -- would attach itself to a proposed law that would target poor, vulnerable women like Patel and Shuai.

Ah well, "gendercide," "fetal homicide," criminalized pregnancies, grieving families, targetted "communities" -- what does it matter to people on a Mission from Gawd?

Here's our Minister of National Defense at ARPA's "God & Government 2014" bunfest.


(Yes, I realize that photo is irrelevant, but I like it.)

UPDATE, Feb. 25/15: Windsor Star is running a poll on whether a fetal homicide law is needed. And as commenter Anon says, people are letting their emotions get in the way of the actual threat to women's rights such a law would present.

Thursday, 6 March 2014

"Parental Consent" Comes to Canada

In what is believed to be a first in Canada, a new partnership between Saskatchewan ProLife and ARPA (Association for Reformed Political Action) is trying to bring parental consent regulations to Saskatchewan.

This is currently the situation.
I’m under the age of 18, do I need parental consent to have an abortion?

There is currently no legislation regarding the age of consent for obtaining an abortion in Canada; however, many hospitals have their own internal policy regarding parental consent. Some hospitals require parental consent for any type of surgery performed on a young person. The age when parental consent is required varies. You can ask about the rules regarding parental consent at your local public health unit. Free-standing abortion clinics do not require a parent’s permission for an abortion, if it is clear that the youth understands what she is doing.
Specificly, here's the deal.
In Saskatchewan abortion is available up to the 16th week of pregnancy (12 weeks in Saskatoon, 16 weeks in Regina) and is covered under Saskatchewan Health, provided a woman has a valid Provincial Health Number (PHN).

But here's what the new gang says: “The capacity to become pregnant and the capacity for mature judgement concerning the wisdom of an abortion are not necessarily related.”

Because if a teen isn't mature enough to decide whether she needs an abortion, she's totally mature enough to give birth. Riiight.

Then there are some small matters of human rights and privacy. If a young woman doesn't want her parents to know, there's probably a bloody good reason.

We remember ARPA, don't we? It's the Dominionist gang who back in 2009 polled potential Ontario Conservative leaders on abortion and whatnot and posted the results for us to find, rather inconveniently for Tim Hudak, who had told the god-squad that he would defund abortion. Oops.

Here is ARPA's mission and it is a Mission.
The mission of ARPA Canada is to educate, equip, and encourage Reformed Christians to political action and to bring a biblical perspective to our civil authorities.
Another familiar outfit in this new bunfest is We Need A Law, fronted by ARPA member, Mike Schouten. (We Need A Law is the bogus grassroots group conjured up to support Woodworth's Wank, aka M312.)

Now that we've got the players sorted out, let's have a closer look at what they want (bold mine).
Parental consent for abortion legislation will not prevent women from requesting and receiving an abortion.  It will not stop abortion from occurring. It will not make abortion illegal.

Rather, parental consent for abortion, drafted to withstand the test of constitutionality, will protect the health and welfare of minors, as well as foster family unity and protect the constitutional rights of parents to raise their children and be involved in the steps of that process. With the loving support of their parents, many young women will be able to bring their babies into the world and not face the physical risks and emotional devastation that an abortion can bring.
Sure. And with abusive and/or fetus fetishist parents who threaten to kick her out of the house or worse, many teens will be forced to bear a child perhaps fathered by a member of that "loving" family.

So far, this campaign is limited to Saskatchewan, but you can bet that there are anti-choicers elsewhere watching carefully, ready to roll out the same bullshit across the country.

There are already moves in several provinces to defund abortion.

We've also got moves to ban certain methods of abortion. For example, the theme for this year's March for Lies is RU 4 Life, a genius play on RU486, the abortion drug still, unaccountably, NOT approved yet by Health Canada.

Now we've got a nascent "parental rights" schtick. Can mandatory ultrasounds, mandatory waiting periods, etfuckingcetera be far behind?

There is absolutely no stomach for reopening the abortion debate in Canada, as even Master Panderer Stephen Harper realizes. But the fetus fetishists are relentless.

And so are we. We will continue to watch and report.



Monday, 20 August 2012

Redefinitions

In case you missed it, here's the Tea Party gaffe du jour (video at link).
Senate Candidate and Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO) told a local television station on Sunday that “legitimate rape” rarely produces pregnancy because “the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.” Akin cited conversations with unnamed doctors for the bizarre claim.

Twitter went batzoid. In my opinion, Kaili Joy Gray won the Intertoobz with:
Pregnancy is just a woman's way of consenting retroactively.
(By the way, here's a real sciencey paper on rape related pregnancy, a brief history of politicians' use of this canard, and a history of the BAD (biased, agenda-driven) science behind it.)

While Akin issued a statement later saying he'd 'misspoken', he did not retract the claim.

Why would he? He believes it. He was also co-sponsor -- with VP candidate Paul Ryan -- of the attempt to redefine 'forcible rape'.

Akin belongs to a church called the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) and hold a Masters in Divinity from its college.
A 2001 PCA report on the prospect of women serving in combat positions in the military, titled "Man's Duty to Protect Woman," states, "woman is the weaker sex and part of her weakness is the vulnerability attendant to her greatest privilege-that God has made her the 'Mother of all the living.' Men are to guard and protect her as she carries in her womb, gives birth to, and nurses her children." 

Yes, that was written in 2001, not 1001.

In its lengthy position papers on abortion, the PCA has made clear that what it claims are biblical prohibitions on abortion should take precedence over any other law, because of its views on the separation of church and state.
But there's more. Not only is he a proud Dominionist, he's linked to a batshitcrazier branch of it -- Christian Supremacists.

So what? you're thinking. The US is full of religious nuts.

Thing is, we got 'em here too. Maybe not as many, but in prominent and influential positions.

Look what Dave at the Galloping Beaver wrote in 2008.

And they're still at it. In fact, one of the Astroturf groups backing Woodworth's Wank is a project of one of these gangs.

Here's their avowed mission:
The mission of ARPA Canada is to educate, equip, and encourage Reformed Christians to political action and to shine the light of God’s Word to Canada’s municipal, provincial, and federal governments.
Think Woodworth's Wank is merely a typical mealy-mouthed Canadian effort to have a civilized 'discussion'?

Think again. Not only is Woody's Wank authored by a member of an older theocracy, it is enthusiastically supported by exactly the same kind of nutters as Todd Akin.

In the US, Dominionists want to redefine 'rape'. In Canada, Dominionists just want to redefine 'person'.

BONUS: Amy Davidson at the New Yorker. Excellent deconstruction.

Wednesday, 2 May 2012

Woodworth's Wank: The ARPA Connection

As we reported yesterday, the Association for Reformed Political Action (ARPA) is behind the new player in the Undebate, We Need a Law (that link is to its Myths page; go read).

Also yesterday -- the day of WNAL's launch -- the legal counsel for ARPA, André Schutten opined at LifeShite on the usual blacks, women, and Jews weren't considered human either BS.

Now, since ARPA has been of great assistance to DJ! in ferreting shit out in the past, we decided to look some more.

And we found stuff!

There is a cool page at the Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying of Canada where one can find out who is lobbying whom.

A search for ARPA revealed this.

On February 3, March 3, and March 27, 2012, ARPA's Executive Director, Mark Penninga, lobbied CON MPs Rod Bruinooge, Mark Warawa (three times), Rob Clarke, and Brad Trost, plus Senator Gerry St. Germain and Liberal MP John McKay.

Bruinooge, Trost, and McKay are well-known fetus fetishists. Campaign Lie rates Clarke as unknown. It doesn't rate Senators, so St. Germain's views are unknown.

So who is this Mark Warawa who merited three visits -- once seemingly just for him? Campaign Lie is still evaluating his status on fetus fetishism.

I think they can upgrade him now.

So, over three occasions, ARPA lobbied three known FFs, three unknown and seems to have influenced at least one on this project -- if, indeed, that was the purpose of Penninga's trip.

An odd use of time, wouldn't you think?

Lobbying back-benchers, a senator, and a Liberal.

The search result returned only those 7 reports from this year.
I wondered how to search further back and found nothing useful. For comparison purposes, I searched for 'Canadian Medical Association'. Woo. Found 337 reports going back to July 2008.

Makes ARPA look like pikers in the lobbying department with only 7 reports.

What are they up to? Stay tuned.

Tuesday, 1 May 2012

Brought to You by Dominionists: 'We Need a Law'

[ADDED May 27/12: Attention, visitors from NatPo, check this out.]


There's a new player in the UnDebate, or, Woodworth's Wank.

Tada! Unleashed today, We Need a Law (Like a Hole in the Head). Its tagline is 'preborn human rights'.

Here's its glurge-filled media release.

The site was created on January 18, so this has been in the works for a while.

The front man is Mike Schouten of Surrey, BC. An interesting career fetus fetishist/Dominionist.




He ran as a Christian Heritage Party candidate in the last federal election.

I didn't know this. The CHP called for a moratorium on Muslim immigration.
The federal Christian Heritage Party is calling for a national moratorium on immigration from Muslim countries to curb increasing radical Islamist power in Canada.

Mike Schouten, CHP candidate for South Surrey-White Rock-Cloverdale, admits his party's stance on this issue will likely result in charges of racism. But he says it's about protecting Canadian values as outlined in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

"This issue, because of the climate of political correctness, is not allowed to be talked about," Schouten noted.
Shocker! He didn't win.

On January 26 this year, it was reported that he parted company with CHP (emphasis mine).
Cloverdale’s Mike Schouten has parted ways with the Christian Heritage Party, handing in his party membership earlier this month.

As the CHP’s candidate for South Surrey - White Rock - Cloverdale in the 2010 federal election, Schouten came in sixth out of nine, with 429 votes.

He told Black Press he did a lot of soul-searching after the campaign, wondering if his “gifts and talents were well used in a political setting.”
. . .
Schouten says his parting with the CHP is amicable. He left because he has another opportunity to concentrate more on the pro-life cause that is his primary concern than he did within the CHP.

His letter to the editor, “Gay lobbyists forcing ideology on youth,” (Cloverdale Reporter, June 3, 2010), which lamented the “hijacking of local anti-bullying campaigns by homosexual advocates,” and referred to homosexuality as a “completely unnatural lifestyle,” drew criticism from other readers.
And he's a fairly regular commenter at ProWoman, ProLie.

More googling. And we find some more stuff.

Schouten (plus, one presumes, relatives Jody and Doug) are aaaallll over the Association for Reformed Political Action.

Regular readers here will remember ARPA, yes? It's where we found that little nugget of info about Tim Hudak pledging to defund abortion.

Here's a sample contribution from Schouten at the ARPA site.
It’s time Canadians stood up to the bullying of the homosexual community. Their militant efforts to force all of us to not only tolerate but to accept and even celebrate their choice to practise a completely unnatural lifestyle needs to be stopped!
Aaaaand now, the REVEAL
Mike Schouten, from Cloverdale BC, was also able to share with the ARPA reps about an exciting new campaign that he plans to lead, under the direction of ARPA Canada, starting May 1st.
So that's who is behind We Need a Law Like a Hole in the head.

ARPA's mission.
The mission of ARPA Canada is to educate, equip, and encourage Reformed Christians to political action and to shine the light of God’s Word to Canada’s municipal, provincial, and federal governments.
A bunch of racist, homophobic, misogynist gord-botherers who want to take over all levels of government.

We clear on that?

Okey-dokey, then.