Woody's Last Wank

Stephen Woodworth has blown his last wad.

He needed unanimous consent in Parliament today to move his "worth and dignity", aka "Women Are Mere Vessels for the Worth and Dignity of Blobs of Tissue" gambit forward.

He did not get it.

Stephen Woodworth, Member of Parliament for Kitchener Centre, today asked Members of Parliament to unanimously agree that every Canadian law must be interpreted in a manner which recognizes the equal worth and dignity of everyone who is in fact a human being. Woodworth asked the House of Commons, “Who here wants to deny the equal worth and dignity of any fellow human being?”

During routine procedures at 10:00 AM Eastern time, some Members of Parliament voted “nay” when MP Woodworth asked for unanimous consent.

And that's it.

We at DAMMIT JANET! have been following this wingnut for months (years?) now and now declare his much extended 15 minutes of fame over.

We're done with him.

As, we sincerely hope, will be the good people of Kitchener Centre in the next election.

Woodworth: The Coming Zombie Puppet Apocalypse!

I'm confused. Is Woody threatening a zombie apocalypse or a Muppet movie remake?

So reluctant is he to mention the A word that he is driven to moronic allegories and now puppets (?).

Really the man makes no sense. (bold added)

Under Parliamentary rules Woodworth cannot, without unanimous consent, bring this Motion to a vote so he will seek the unanimous consent of Members of Parliament. During Woodworth’s Member’s Statement on Monday, March 31, 2014 he noted that “If even one Member of this House refuses to consent to this essential principle of democratic governance it will be a dark and dangerous day for Canada.

”

Woodworth said: “Laws like subsection 223(1), which falsely condemn as non-human those we know to be human, are savage and inhumane, a throwback to a more barbarous age.” Any Member opposing Motion 476 is denying the equal worth and dignity of every member of the human family affirmed in the U.N. Universal Declaration of Human Rights. He went on to say that in addition, "Similarly, if anyone opposes Motion 476a, they clearly haven't seen the latest Muppet Movie and are simply out of touch with their Child side...and probably reality as well."

Woodworth posing with his hand puppets "Les" and "Bess" in a press conference says " I would like this Motion to include hand puppets as well because they are so human-like at times to me, and have become almost equals when it comes to hammering home some of my best ideas in parliament. It'll be a sad day for puppets if this Motion goes down in flames.

Woodworth says Motion 476a (which will include puppets) will underline the reason why it is important for Canadians to refuse to accept any law which condemns as non-human anyone we know to be human or suspect to have human-like qualities...for instance--puppets!

Miss Piggy, whom is often viewed as more human than some people and certainly more than some politicians, could not be reached for comment.

Well, as for puppets being people too, Woody, as a backbench Conservative MP, should know.

More on the Canadian Sexual Two-Step

First, the step back:

DJ! fave (^NOT) Stephen Woodworth is at it again.

Meanwhile, Conservative MP Stephen Woodworth hits the stage at the National Press Theatre for "an important announcement" on his backbench bid to have the Commons "affirm that every Canadian law must be interpreted in a manner that recognizes in law the equal worth and dignity of everyone who is in fact a human being" -- which is, of course, a not terribly veiled attempt to restart the 'conversation' that he had hoped to trigger with his original, more obviously abortion-targeted motion in 2012.

As he has already used up his slot on the private members' priority list, Woodworth will almost certainly not get the opportunity to see his motion go to the House floor under his name, but he may have successfully persuaded a colleague to carry on the campaign.

That was from National Treasure Kady O'Malley, who when asked which MPs might give up his or her spot for this quixotic ploy, responded with this link and the additional information that the first 15 names have priority.

Those names are:

122. Chong, Michael
123. Brosseau, Ruth Ellen
124. Ayala, Paulina
125. Mayes, Colin
126. Chisu, Corneliu
127. Péclet, Ève
128. Hoback, Randy
129. Leef, Ryan
130. Hayes, Bryan
131. Van Kesteren, Dave
132. Choquette, François
133. Valeriote, Frank
134. Patry, Claude
135. Stanton, Bruce
136. Morin, Isabelle

From Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada's list of anti-choice MPs, there are three possibles: Mayes, Hoback, and Van Kesteren.

We live and see.

From the step-forward file: New Brunswick students call for an end to the shameful and illegal refusal of NB to fund abortions.

A group of students at St. Thomas University has launched an online petition asking the New Brunswick government to fund abortions at a private clinic.

The aspiring social workers say they know women who have had difficulty accessing abortions and they want the province to fund abortions at Fredericton’s private Morgentaler Clinic.

Here's their petition, now with more than 3,000 signatures.

Support the students' efforts and women's rights in New Brunswick.

UPDATE to Woodworth bit: Kady reports that she missed the beginning of his presser, but noted that he seemed to be giving the speech he always gives.

OKAY! Finally! News! Oh, for heaven's sake: Woodworth is going to stand up and ask for unanimous consent for his motion. #Hw

— kady o'malley (@kady) April 8, 2014

If every MP who was going to make a doomed attempt to seek unanimous consent held a press conference, we'd never get anything else done. #hw

— kady o'malley (@kady) April 8, 2014

Woodworth claims it will be 'a dark and dangerous day for Canada' if even one MP says nay. #hw

— kady o'malley (@kady) April 8, 2014

I thought he'd persuaded one of his colleagues to put it forward in the next batch of private members' biz. That would have been news! #hw

— kady o'malley (@kady) April 8, 2014

Upshot: Same old bullshit.

Dead women don't, and can't give life.

What a morbid thought, correct?

In Canada, 26 years ago today the Supreme Court decision R. v. Morgentaler  removed legal obstacles preventing women from accessing abortion - a medical procedure under the purview of professionals who administer the public health care system.

But in Texas where the rights of corporations, guns and fetus are promoted by Bible-thumpers who claim they represent the will of God the Father, the laws of the state can desecrate and violate the rights of ordinary living breathing people.

If there are profits to be made, weapons to be cherished and a zygote, embryo or fetus to be deployed as a weapon in the War On Women, you can bet that rightwing religious fundamentalist Republican legislators will be there to shrieeekingly defend those rights.

This happened.

Marlise, a 33-year old paramedic, got up the night of Nov. 26 to fix a bottle for her toddler son.

Her husband Erick, also a paramedic and a firefighter, woke up and realized she had not returned to bed.

He found Marlise collapsed on the floor, not breathing and with no pulse. It’s believed she suffered a blood clot to the lung that deprived her of oxygen for more than an hour.

Erick frantically performed cardiopulmonary resuscitation and called an ambulance. Marlise was taken to John Peter Smith Hospital in Fort Worth and connected to a ventilator to artificially simulate breathing.

It was too late. Marlise was gone. According to court filings, doctors knew this within two days, after tests registered a complete absence of brain function. This was not a “coma” or “vegetative state.” It is the legal and medical definition of dead.

Marlise Muñoz was an emergency medical technician, a paramedic familiar with end-of-life issues who had told her husband that she would not want to be kept "alive" by machines.

Her family hired a lawyer; a rational, sane judge heard their arguments and ordered the hospital to stop preserving the decaying body of their beloved in a technologically-assisted embalmed state.  Marlise had been declared medically and legally dead; in trying to protect the rights of the fetus as it believed Texas law instructed it to do, the hospital (or fetushists on staff) turned her into a "cadaverous incubator". More medical information here, from Dr Jen Gunter.

THIS is the nightmare that CPC MPs Vellacott and Woodworth would inflict upon Canadian women and their families.

Knight of Columbus Stephen Woodworth claims how "savage and inhumane it is to have a law on the Canadian books which falsely condemns as non-human people who are human" - quite a whopper of a word-salad obfuscation. Women have tried to instruct this obdurate Vatican Taliban foot-soldier on how women experience pregnancy — wanted or not — but he won't listen.  In his mind, he is a grandiloquent medieval cavalier, "saving" fetus everywhere and forcing women to carry unwanted pregnancies to term.

"Savage and inhumane" is exactly the treatment that women would suffer if *fetus rights* forced hospitals to use women like meat incubators to placate anti-choice zealots' ideologically-dictated demands.  Would gestating women who smoke, who drink alcohol, who eat the "wrong" food, who are addicted to legal or illegal drugs and who have sex while pregnant, get strapped down and supervised to prevent actions that could imperil their fetus?

Not in my Canada.  

I applaud the recent commentary in the Canadian Medical Association Journal as well as those who are urging Health Canada to approve mifepristone as a physician-facilitated medical abortion. Also known as RU486, it is administered very early in the pregnancy instead of surgery. It induces a miscarriage, similar to spontaneous abortions that occur frequently during the first trimester.

In support of Canadian women's ongoing push-back against the reactionary individuals and groups who would deprive them of basic reproductive rights, I will continue writing and tweeting on these issues.

Woody's Wank Redux

To no-one's surprise, attention-whore Stephen Woodworth is back with another non-abortion abortion gambit.

Conservative MP Stephen Woodworth is out with another motion that could re-ignite the abortion debate in Ottawa, although he says it's merely about respect for human dignity in law.

Yaaaa. Just like Woody's Wank I was *not* about abortion either.

So why are all the usual suspects applauding the move then?

Here's LifeShite:

Tuesday’s media advisory was titled ‘Motion 312 – Next Steps’, suggesting Woodworth intends to piggyback on his previous efforts.

Great idea, Woody. Because M312 was such a resounding success. NOT.

Little problem, though. Woody is not on the list for private members' bills and motions.

But fellow fetus fetishists Liberal John McKay and Conservative Brad Trost are. Might they give up their chance to push their hobby horses for another kick at the abortion can?

I doubt it. But hey, anything to distract from current scandals, eh?

We at DAMMIT JANET! are ready to gear up again if we have to, so go ahead, Woody, bring it.

In particular, we are breathlessly awaiting Part D'uh of his genius ballooning 'allegory'. We wondered at the time why he titled it 'Part I'. Now we know and are holding our sides in anticipation of the sequel.

(No. I haven't been abducted by aliens. Just very very busy.)

Woody's New Wank

SHOCKING NEWS! Pro-choice group refuses to sign on to latest anti-abortion stalking horse gambit!

Woody's got a brand-new wank. And guess what? It's just like the old wank.

Woodworth said he reached out to Joyce Arthur, the executive director of the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada, for support on the motion. The group is a prominent national pro-choice organization.

Woodworth said he wrote to the group in January with the specific wording of the motion: “That the Parliament of Canada declare that the equal worth and dignity of everyone must be recognized by Canadian law based on their inherent nature as a human being.”

He said Arthur wrote back the next day, and that he then responded and then received no further response from ARCC.

Arthur said she and her group declined Woodworth’s request because they felt it would lead to giving rights to a fetus, which would have dangerous consequences for pregnant mothers.

“He doesn’t seem to recognize that at all,” said Arthur. “When I bring up women’s rights over and over again, he thinks it’s some sort of sideshow. He doesn’t really get the issue, so what’s the point of talking about it with him?”

Woodworth said in a media release that he has "regretfully concluded" the ARCC "simply refuses to affirm human equality."

"We think the ulterior motive is that he's trying to include fetuses in the definition of 'everyone,'" Arthur said.

Ayup. Seems so.

We don't need to woman the barricades just yet. After the trouncing #M312 took last fall, he may have difficulty finding another kamikazi MP to co-sponsor this latest piece of bullshit.

Also, he'll have to wait until the next federal election, by which time if the good people of Kitchener Centre come to their senses, Woody will be wanking all on his lonely.

If you've got ten minutes to waste, listen to this radio interview, in which Woody seems genuinely surprised that ARCC didn't leap at the chance to join in fucking over Canadian women.

Is he really that much of a moran? Who the hell did he think was behind the campaign to Crush Motion 312?

ADDED BONUS: Seems Woody has memory-holed his genius analogy about abortion and ballooning. Pity that. But I found a thorough and fun fisking of it that really captures the lunacy.

Pro smack-down of M408

One of the MASSIVE irritants that swims in the eddy churned up by CON MP Mark Warawa's misogynistic M408 is the twitter spamming campaign in which the antiChoice lobby engages.

The shrieeeking, the lack of finesse, the crude lies, the pitiful attempts at logical thinking.

My co-blogger fern hill has done a brilliant job of addressing, challenging and smacking down the most odious of those tweets.  And she has blogged frequently at DJ! in response to the obfuscation and sheer stoopidity of M408.

And yet, some in the media appear content to parrot Warawa's and Woodworth's twisty prevarications about women's right to choose —with the support of Canadian healthcare professionals— whether to continue carrying a pregnancy to term or not.

It is a simple, clear-cut proposition. The voluntary termination of a pregnancy is a medical procedure.  It is regulated in Canada through public health care.  Canada is not a christian theocracy.  It has - or used to have - a secular government.  Religious freedom implies that individuals can observe their own private religious beliefs, practices and rituals at will - but NOT enforce those upon people who have different ones.

This Op-Ed piece in the Ottawa Citizen addresses the abusive obfuscation that M408 has generated, most lucidly and potently.

That the fetus you are carrying is female is certainly a terrible reason to have an abortion — but, good or bad, your reason is none of the government’s business. It’s simply not the place of our federal Parliament to voice an opinion on the merit of this or that reason behind a woman’s choice to have an abortion.[...]

It’s not for Parliament to voice an opinion on women’s reasons for having abortions, for human fetuses are neither in fact persons nor recognized as such in Canadian law. They are not persons for they have no interests; they lack the self-consciousness necessary for having interests.

Since they lack interests, human fetuses cannot be wronged. They cannot, therefore, be wronged by being discriminated against, not on grounds of sex, not on any grounds.

Warawa’s motion, then, makes no sense. No fetus is wrongfully discriminated against when it is aborted on account of its being female, so sex-selective pregnancy termination involves no wrongful discrimination for Parliament to condemn.

Now this is not to say that the fact that some women in Canada choose to abort fetuses because of their sex is no proper concern of civil society or even of the Canadian government.

It may very well be a proper matter of concern for you and me, and perhaps our government eventually has some role to play. But no one, no doctor, no ultrasound technician, no politician should seek to place any barrier between any pregnant woman and an abortion.

"It’s simply not the place of our federal Parliament to voice an opinion on the merit of this or that reason behind a woman’s choice to have an abortion."  Expect the zygote zealots to shriEEEk in reply to this view. It is a bracing, thoughtful antidote to the religious fundamentalist, authoritarian, crotch-sniffing ideologues who are lobbying to criminalize abortion.

Update: fern hill caught tweets from @ThomasHall17 - a retired House of Commons procedural clerk, who sets the record straight with regard to M408.  That alleged sacrosanct parliamentary "right" that some mansplainers tried to foist upon proChoice supporters, bellowing that Warawa was entitled to something that was bigger and more important than our silly little hill of beans? 

All self-indulgent BS.  Thomas Hall has the real 411.

It starts here.  A very good, illuminating read.

Whose safety?

A group of students stage an impromptu theatrical intervention, to welcome Con MP Stephen Woodworth (of Motion 312 infamy) to the University of Waterloo.

There are more students protesting his appearance at a *Campus Crusade for Life* club than there are Zygote/Embryo/Fetus zealots present to hear him...

One of the proChoice agitprop performers said to the cops shielding Woodworth from verbal remonstrations and the Vagina-Lady: "Why are you concerned about his safety and not the safety of our uteruses?" 

Here's an overview of DJ! previous posts about Woodworth's Wank.

Grand merci to Canadian Cynic for bringing another Woodworth FAIL to our attention — though I disagree with his comment. Buffoon antics are the perfect way to foil rightwing christian fundamentalist ideology and tactics!

Meanwhile, with M408 the antiChoice forces within Harper's CPC get ready to launch another attack against women's reproductive justice rights and pregnant women's right to choose to carry (or not) their pregnancy to term on March 28 - right in time for Easter! 

Con MP Mark Warawa's Motion 408 is also a thinly disguised attempt to criminalize abortion, women, and the healthcare professionals who provide medical support.

ADDED: According to the Notional Pest, the artist known as Vulveeta is from WLU and he made that nifty outfit.  Those rightwing christianist conservatives like Woodworth just suck all the fun out of fundamentalism.  So dour and sour.

If you repeat a lie often enough ...

Why do zygote zealots and fetus fetishists lie and lie and lie and lie?

Self-righteous pricks like Con MPs Woodworth, Vellacott and Warawa claim they want to *open the debate*.  The sixth estate exposes their lies; these rightwing religious fundamentalists want to pass laws that criminalize abortion.

With the help of paid propagandists like Jonathan Kay, who can't be bothered to present accurate and correct facts in his odious piece of obfuscating glurge.

My first pregnancy ended in a miscarriage.

It required a medical intervention to prevent an infection that could have killed me, which happened to Savita Halappanavar in similar circumstances, and to facilitate healing so I might become pregnant in the future, as was my desire.

Now imagine what that would be like if abortion were criminalized at 19 weeks? 

Documentation and evidence would have to be gathered - just like a rape kit - to prove that I hadn't "provoked" my own miscarriage, and then hauled myself to emergency while something bigger and more intense than four menstruations' worth of blood gushed forth. 

At the hospital, I (and my husband) would be subjected to an interrogation from the cop on duty, just to satisfy prurient, sanctimonious crotch-sniffers like Babs Kay, Woodworth, Vellacott, SUZANNE and Maggie Somerville - that it was "really and truly" a miscarriage. 

Health care professionals providing the necessary emergency dilation and curettage would have to complete numerous forms as proof that this health crisis wasn't a "homicide", and that none of us deserved to be jailed, as the fetus lobby would like to see happen.

As fern hill said, there is no LAW regulating abortion but there are medical protocols, procedures and RESTRICTIONS that our public health care system has established with regard to the termination of gestation.

Disgusting tactics that vilify and demonize women and their physicians only serve to provoke acts of violence from mentally unstable people who believe such lies.

Do Canadian doctors, or perhaps a surgical team providing a life-saving procedure to a pregnant woman need to become the target of an abortion vigilante before people like Jonathan Kay take responsibility for publishing LIES?

Illustration above from here.

Support for Unrestricted Abortion Skyrocketing

Oh dear. That old bugaboo, unintended consequences, is biting back big time.

In both Canada and the US, classic overreach on the abortion issue is creating a 'backlash among moderates'.

Here in Canada, support for unrestricted abortion is skyrocketing

The question asked on October 27: Should abortion be legal in all circumstances, should it be legal in some circumstances or should it be illegal in all circumstances?

A Forum Research poll for the National Post recently asked 1,735 randomly selected Canadians 18 years of age or older when abortion should be legal.

A full 60% of Canadians said always.

That’s surprisingly high. Even more surprising: That number’s skyrocketed in recent months. In a similar Forum poll conducted last February, only 51% of Canadians took that position.

Leap of 9 points in 8 months. Woo.

Pundits speculate that the cause may be the attempted reopening of the abortion debate -- that nobody wants -- by wannabe allegorist Stephen Woodworth.

Perhaps amplified by moronic musings on rape and magic lady parts by USian ReThuglican candidates.

In the US, a poll taken after the election shows solid majority support for abortion rights.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely U.S. Voters shows that 54% describe themselves as pro-choice on the issue of abortion, while 38% say they are pro-life.

Note that both these surveys were taken before the public learned of the death-by-religion of Savita Halappanavar in Ireland.

Wonder what the next polls will show. . .

ShriEEEk! Radical foreign lobby funds Canadian group

Oh.  Wait. 

This radical foreign "special interest" lobby?

The Catholic Organization for Life and Family [...] was cofounded by the Conference of Bishops and the world’s largest fraternal Catholic organization, the U.S.-based Knights of Columbus, “to build a culture of life and a civilization of love by promoting respect for human life and dignity and the essential role of the family.”  [...]
Although COLF is autonomous and they do their own publication, they still rely on outside sources to survive and are co-funded largely by the Conference of Bishops and the Knights of Columbus  [...] Based out of Connecticut, the Knights of Columbus run a network of charitable organizations which fund everything from broadcast media and construction of churches to scholarships and political activism. As of February 2011, the Canadian Knights have 227,538 members comprising 1,942 councils which form a dominant part of a link connecting potent Members of Parliament, the pro-life movement and the Catholic church.
Woodworth is a Knight, as are Americans John Boehner, Jeb Bush, and Rick Santorum.  [...]  The Canadian March of Life received $6,250 from the Knights of Columbus in 2004. In 2005, the Ottawa march disappeared from the books, but the Campaign for Life Coalition became an item on the cash recipient list with $17,752 in total financial support from 2005 to 2007.
Furthermore, according to a public statement by the Canadian Knights of Columbus, the annual interest of their $1 million Bishop du Laval fund is given directly to the Conference of Bishops. The statement also notes that the “Canadian Knights have also been key supporters and participants in Canada’s annual March of Life.” [...]
A March news release by the American Knights of Columbus records a private luncheon attended by Supreme Director of the Canadian Knights, Robert Cayea, and Speaker of the House, Conservative MP Andrew Scheer. The Speaker is himself a member of the Knights of Columbus Council 10418 in Regina. Other notable members of the Knights include Conservative MP Jason Kenney, Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism, and a potential successor to PM Stephen Harper.

From here.



Its representatives (that we know) in the House of Commons: MP Stephen Woodworth, Minister Jason Kenney and Speaker Andrew Scheer.

Where's *Ethical Oil* Kathryn Marshall to shrieeek about a radical "foreign special interest" lobby and the art of political puppetry when her incomparable performance art is required?

This will have to do, then. 

Grand merci to Teri Mooring.

Woodworth and 'Modern' Science

Aww. Isn't this cute? MP Stephen Woodworth, he of Woodworth's Wank, is still in the public eye he has grown addicted to.

But uh-oh, look at this.

Under the heading Woodworth garnering all the wrong attention Joseph McNinch-Pazzano writes:

After Kitchener-Centre Member of Parliament Stephen Woodworth’s failed attempt to reopen the abortion debate in Canada, you might have thought he would gracefully exit the spotlight of hot button social issues. Regrettably, this is not the case.

On Oct.7, Woodworth was a featured guest for an event in Quebec where he appeared alongside Michel Lizotte, an outspoken advocate who believes that gay people can become straight if they simply choose to do so.

Woodworth was criticized in the House of Commons, but has not yet responded to the criticism nor made a public statement disowning what Lizotte advocates.

At the event, Lizotte reportedly delivered a lecture on sexual re-orientation.

Lizotte advocates for gays to learn “how to be freed from thoughts, attractions or unwanted homosexual behavior while taking the path of heterosexuality.”

One of two things could explain Woodworth’s silence.

The MP could actually believe the psychologically-debunked nonsense that Lizotte trumpets.

Or, Woodworth could oppose what Lizotte advocates but refuses to publicly state his disagreement—which is equally detrimental to gay rights.

McNinch-Pazzano goes on to demolish Lizotte's nonsense. Then winds up:

In his attempt to reopen the debate about when life begins, Woodworth stated that “our 400-year-old definition of a human being says a child does not become a human being until the moment of complete birth, contrary to 21st century medical evidence.”

If Woodworth wants to invoke his conceptions of modern medicine in the abortion debate, he must give equal time to the notion in the gay rights debate.

Woodworth cannot simply turn a blind eye to an activist who is living in 1970s psychology textbooks.

Among the Kitchener-Centre constituents that Woodworth purportedly represents are young men and women who are looking for guidance and acceptance of who they are.

If Woodworth does not have the decency to come out in strong opposition to Lizotte and his views, then perhaps he should reconsider whether he espouses the necessary values to represent the people of Kitchener-Centre.

Or, perhaps better yet, the people of Kitchener-Centre should tell Woodworth that they would like to have a full-time representative instead of one who seems to be more interested in advocating for the social issues that keep him in the national spotlight.

So much for 'modern' science when it doesn't toe the Vatican Taliban line, eh, Woody?

Is so-called "prolife" shrieeking about this? ^NOT

Remember what every so-called "prolife" M312 supporter, from MP Woodworth himself to Faytene Grasseschi, from his colleague Breitkreuz to the young! women! on the Caravan spouted?

“Until a child’s little toe pops out of the birth canal, that child is not recognized as a human being in Canada”... was THE speaking point parroted over and over and over and over ...

Our sister blogger JJ suggested a simple fix for Woodworth's problem with Subsection 223(1) of the Criminal Code, one that would have kept abortion legal, a medical procedure provided by a physician.

Since Woodworth's Wank was really, truly about re-criminalizing abortion and imposing terms of limitations it was eventually defeated in the House of Commons.

So... about that "little toe popping out of the birth canal", it seems the only advocates for a women and her child born in risky circumstances are her mother and the Elizabeth Fry Society. 

Julie Bilotta told the Ottawa-Carleton Detention Centre she was in pain for about nine hours before giving birth to her son, Gionni Lee, through a "breech birth." A breech birth occurs when the baby enters the birth canal with the buttocks or feet first instead of the head first.
Bilotta claims guards ignored her calls for help and became irritated by her cries, transferring her from a shared cell to a segregation cell. That is where she gave birth four hours after the transfer. Bilotta also said she underwent two tests from nurses in the jail, who believed she was in false labour.
Bilotta's mother was in tears while detailing the incident as described by her daughter. "She was screaming in a lot of pain and nobody would help her," Kim Hurtubise said outside the Ottawa Hospital's General Campus.

From here.

There are no so-called "prolifers" shrieeeking about a woman who chose to gestate until term, who might have died giving birth, while her fetus' toes were outside her body, but the rest stuck inside because the correctional facility refused to provide medical assistance?

Ooops.  Forgot that for MP Woodworth and his supporters, pregnant women are only "locations" purposed in servitude to the unborn.  They won't be shrieeeking their outrage now, since it's no longer a fetus and its well-being is therefore not useful in their ideological war on women.

Oh, the hypocrisy.

Um, Woody, About That 'Preoccupation'. . .

Woody is still wanking.

"Woodworth Says Opponents of M312 Must Give Up Single-Minded Preoccupation with Abortion"

That's the headline about Motion 312 that should have been applied to every commentary.

He then goes on to whine about the 'preoccupation with abortion' that he thinks killed his motion and in the process uses the word 'abortion' eighteen times.

Here's a sample:

Support a study about how best in Canada to honour the principle that human rights must be extended to every human being? No, our preoccupation with abortion tells us that studying how best to recognize the equal and inherent worth and dignity of every human being would be "the first step on a slippery slope," one said.

That last sentiment is more worthy of a bloodthirsty, fascist regime than of the democracy most of us would like Canada to be.

Project much, Woody?

Image source.

Dishonesty

Woodworth's Wank has been insultingly dishonest from the get-go.

As JJ said:

Pro-#M312: if you'd just come out from the start & said what u really wanted (#personhood), I could have respected that. But u had to lie

— JJ (@jjhippie) August 16, 2012

.@fernhilldammit Exactly. Had they been honest, I'd have disagreed but would have respected their democratic right to pursue that end #M312

— JJ (@jjhippie) August 16, 2012

But no. Woody thought he was sooooo clever. Faffing about with talk of a '400-year old law' that needed 'modernizing' with input from experts.

If they were serious about imprecise, antiquated language, there is a simple fix as JJ has pointed out repeatedly on Twitter. In sec. 223 of the Criminal Code change 'human being' to 'person'. There. Problem solved.


But no. Because while SHRIEEEKING (as usual for Fetus Fascists) that their cute little ploy had nothing zip zero nada rien to do with abortion, it is about if not personhood then about gestational limits to abortion.

The ploy itself is a lie. And the ensuing 'campaign' has been a laff riot.

Why Lifesite would choose to publish this less-than-encouraging data at the height of the battle of words & wits over Motion 312 is a mystery.  But then again, why not: it’s in line with the haphazard and utterly clueless way the rest of the M312 campaign has been run, a confused and riotous crusade of Twitterspam, fetusmobiles, inconsistencies, transparent lies and general dumbness.  For an initiative thought by some to be the last kick at the anti-abortion can for a long, long time, the ineptitude of its handling has been breathtaking to behold.

And fun to watch.  Did I mention fun to watch?

They could have salvaged some cred by -- as I relentlessly asked -- offering up some examples of experts MPs should hear from should M312 pass.

Fumbled that ball too.

While JJ finds it fun to watch -- and it has been -- I'm getting really bored. (Betcha regular DJ! readers hit that wall months ago.)

It's soon over. The second and final hour of 'debate' is on September 21, with the vote on September 26.

How big will the FAIL WHALE be? According to ARCC, there are 108 anti-choice MPs. Those among that number with any political sense or ambition in Stevie Spiteful's caucus are booking dental appointments for September 26 as we speak.

How many will be left? I'm thinking Woody will be lucky to get 70 yeas.

What do you think?

(Not So) Baseless Smears!

Waaaah! Somebody smeared Stephen Woodworth, he of Woodworth's Wank/M312, on Twitter! While he was getting his sick mum a hamburger! His press release, sans mention of the burger. (By the way, the Guelph Mercury does a pretty nice smear of the guy who posted it.)

It was all over the place and while I didn't retweet it, knowing by now that Woody is far too slippery to come out and say something that explicit, lots of people did.

deBeauxOs pointed out (can't find the bloody tweet) that while the quote is a conflation of Santorum and Woodworth (and doesn't that creep a body right out?), it seems to reflect his view of the issue.

Now since Woody's got me blocked, it is huge pain in the ass to track down his actual tweets. Luckily, @lahtay44 copied his answer to a question on rape.

Typically, he deflects.

@WoodworthMP: **For some the answer might be different if question was"Do you support a raped woman's right to take her child's life?"**

I don't know if that was in answer to SomeCndnSkeptic, who has been asking for Woody's view on pregnancy resulting from rape for fucking months. I've asked him and will report.

So. You decide. The false quote is grosser, but is it fundamentally different from the loaded-language answer Woody did give?

Image source.

ADDED: SomeCndnSkeptic replies.

@fernhilldammit He said it is unanswerable because we have to "first agree on terms".Spin bullshit. #M312

— Steve Thoms (@SomeCndnSkeptic) June 27, 2012

ADDED: LifeShite links to this post! *Waves* at LifeShiters. Be sure to check this post from today too.

ADDED: LifeShite says I'm accusing fetus fetishists of condoning rape because they oppose abortion even in cases of rape. Have a read of this old post on how ff's discount the incidence of rape-caused pregnancy and thus, 'hey, hardly anybody gets knocked up, what's the big deal with no rape exemption?' I do call that condoning rape, wouldn't you?

Are there *good* and *bad* abortions?

First, read this to understand the particular meaning I'm addressing when I use the terms *good* and *bad* with regard to the medical termination of a pregnancy.

I am making a decision.

The only thing that makes my abortion decision different from anyone else’s abortion decision is that some people who are against abortion will think that my abortion is acceptable.

Some. Not all. Maybe not even most. I honestly have no idea. My life is not in danger, after all. I have not been raped. I merely think that I might not want to sit around, feeling the symptoms of pregnancy, for god knows how long, until a heartbeat stops and the ripping pain kicks in and the blood starts flowing on its own.

Let me be clear. I have options. It’s just that they all suck. That’s kind of how bad news related to pregnancy works.

If you are pregnant, and do not want to be, all of your options suck.*

If you cannot seem to get pregnant, and want to be, all of your options suck.**

If you are pregnant, and won’t be soon, all of your options suck.

There is no universal good option. There is no universal bad option. But for each individual there is an option that is the least bad. Here is why I am pro-choice. If someone has to make a decision and the best they can hope for is the least-bad option, I don’t believe I have any business making that choice for them.

This is the decision that CON CPC MP Stephen Woodworth would want to criminalize.

Instead of letting a woman and her attending physician determine why a pregnancy might be terminated, Woodworth wants to debate how the government would legislate to control these decisions.

Such as anti-choice legislators in Georgia are currently doing.

In addition, if a woman were in the same situation as the author describes in her plight, and she chose to let "nature take its course", her miscarriage could be investigated by police to ensure that she had not engaged in any criminal activity that would have caused the embryo or fetus to be expelled from her uterus prematurely.

This is the inevitable outcome when legislators decide what is the "right" gestational period, when "personhood" commences and who owns women's reproductive capacity.

Michigan goes AntiChoice crazy

Taking a page or 60 from Kansas, Michigan is pushing through a massive omnibus bill that dramatically limits abortion access and threatens to shut down all abortion clinics in the state. And Republicans can’t move fast enough on it.

The 60 page bill was introduced last week, but today lawmakers already held a hearing on it and plan on sending to the full House for a vote. According to Laura Bassett, almost 100 people showed up to testify against the bill, but Committee Chair Gail Haines (R-Waterford) abruptly ended the hearing and cut off all testimony after a Michigan Right to Life spokesperson and a few others in support of the bill testified.

Hunh. Typical antiChoice fetus lobbyist closes the debate after their side got to spew their disinformation. Taking notes, MP Woodworth?

The bill tries to essentially take every popular abortion restrictions working their way through state legislatures and put it into one big horrible law. The bill would criminalize all abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, with no exceptions for rape victims, the health of the mother, or fatal fetal anomalies. It would require health centers that provide abortions to have surgery rooms, even if they do not perform surgical abortions. The bill would also require doctors to be present for medication abortions and to screen women for “coercion” before providing an abortion. It would ban “telemedicine” abortions and would create new regulations for the disposal of all fetal remains.

From here.

Our reader k'in reminds us that Michigan used to have a proChoice governor, Jennifer Granholm.

Is this what women in Canada will have to endure, if Woodworth's *Kinder, Küche, Kirche* M312 recriminalizes abortion?

When she was pregnant with her second child, Jenni Lane of Ann Arbor, MI, was given a routine ultrasound at 18 weeks. Jenni, her husband, and their young daughter were delighted to learn they would be adding a baby boy to their family. But later that night, a phone call brought devastating news: the fetus Jenni was carrying suffered from a severe brain malformation.

Over the course of the next few weeks, Jenni visited specialists and genetic counselors to learn more about her son’s condition. When she learned that he was unlikely to even survive full-term, Jenni made the painful decision to terminate her wanted pregnancy, a decision she understandably describes as “incredibly difficult, and so deeply sad.” By the time her termination was scheduled, Jenni’s pregnancy was in the 21st week.

If Michigan’s extreme anti-abortion legislation — HB 5711, 5712, and 5713 — becomes law, women like Jenni will no longer be permitted to make such a decision.

Woodworth Is a Scaredy-Cat

So, somebody in the PMO leaked to the Globe yesterday.

The Prime Minister’s Office is putting heavy pressure on members of the Conservative caucus to vote down a Tory MP’s effort to trigger a legislative review of when human life legally. It’s unusual for a PMO to work against its own MPs’ motions and private members’ bills but Stephen Harper’s Conservatives are anxious to avoid association with any legislative activity that could be characterized by opponents as re-opening the debate over abortion.

MPs are privately being reminded that support for fellow Conservative Stephen Woodworth’s motion would be considered a vote against Mr. Harper’s wishes. Word being spread in the Commons lobby recently by senior Tories – not the PMO – went even further, saying a vote for Mr. Woodworth’s motion is a vote against Mr. Harper.

This informal coaxing is focused on those who are not considered to have taken firm positions in what has become a polarized debate, including rookie Tory MPs elected for the first time last year as well as fence-sitters and those with strong ambitions to rise in the caucus.

Which was echoed by the Sun (emphasis mine).

Conservative MPs are under intense pressure from the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) to vote against a Tory MP's non-binding motion that calls on Parliament to study when human life begins.

Tory sources say Prime Minister Stephen Harper wants southern Ontario MP Stephen Woodworth's motion eliminated before Parliament rises for the summer in late June.

"The PM himself wants this vote beaten down," one source tells QMI Agency.

There were rumours on Twitter yesterday that Woodworth's Wank would NOT be debated tomorrow nor be voted on on June 13.

So I was wondering if Woodwank were being strong-armed into withdrawing it, which, as I understand things, is the only way to stop it.

But no. This morning:

Woodworth has apparently swapped his spot with Scott Brison, and is now #14 in the PMB precedent list: is.gd/YUSQjW #hw

— kady o'malley (@kady) June 6, 2012

Hmmm.

What's so urgent about Scott Brison's -- a Lib, mind, though former Con, -- private member's motion?

M-315 — April 25, 2012 — Resuming consideration of the motion of Mr. Brison (Kings—Hants), seconded by Ms. Murray (Vancouver Quadra), — That the Standing Committee on Finance be instructed to undertake a study on income inequality in Canada and that this study include, but not be limited to, (i) a review of Canada’s federal and provincial systems of personal income taxation and income supports, (ii) an examination of best practices that reduce income inequality and improve GDP per capita, (iii) the identification of any significant gaps in the federal system of taxation and income support that contribute to income inequality, as well as any significant disincentives to paid work in the formal economy that may exist as part of a “welfare trap”, (iv) recommendations on how best to improve the equality of opportunity and prosperity for all Canadians; and that the Committee report its findings to the House within one year of the adoption of this motion.

Well, that's all laudable, I guess.

But now in 14th place and with little time before the House goes on vacay, The Wank® is unlikely to see the light of day until fall.

Is Woody cruising for a bruising from the PMO? Or just trying to stay alive to fight another day?

Or. Using that well-known Fetus Lobby tactic of Stringing the Fetus Fetishists Along.

And while I was writing that, Kady O'Malley did a quick explainer. (That's why she gets the big bucks. She's fast.)

Under the rules governing private members' business, Woodworth can keep his motion alive virtually indefinitely by trading down the precedent list whenever his name threatens to reach the top. At some point, however, one suspects that his supporters might start to wonder why he seems so reluctant to put the question to the House.

Stringing them along.

Yup. They seem to like it.

Doin' the Twitter Block!

It happened to JJ. It has happened to fern hill.

And now, I'm proud to report that many right-wing, religious zealots that people Twitter have also made me the target of their hissy-fit blocking.

It happens of course when prochoice activists ask too many inCONvenient questions and point out CONtemptuous fallacies in the tweets of abortion-criminalizing fetushists.

So, I've been blocked by cpc MP Stephen Woodworth.

In his *parting* tweet, Woodworth even had the chutzpah to throw back at me the words of the brilliant Molly Ivins that I quote on my Twitter profile page.

There are two kinds of humor. One kind that makes us chuckle about our foibles and our shared humanity. The other kind holds people up to public contempt and ridicule -- that's what I do. Satire is traditionally the weapon of the powerless against the powerful. I only aim at the powerful.

I responded to his tweet by pointing out he had no idea who Molly Ivins was. He also appears aggrieved and to consider himself victimized by prochoice activists who can think faster and better on Twitter than he does.