There are many reasons to be against abortion. In fact, I believe that we are all against abortion. So maybe I ought to say there are many reasons to be pro-life. But I don't buy any of them.
Furthermore, there are many ways to argue for the pro-life movement. But to run into the waiting room of an abortion clinic and pummel patients with dogma is not one of them. Yet, two women, Mary Wagner and Linda Gibbons, have been awarded Diamond Jubilee medals for doing just that.
In Canada, we are so very quick to accuse our Southern neighbours of backwards mentalities that stem from backwater America. Yet, it seems that Canada has an Okie of its very own -- MP Maurice Vellacott of Saskatchewan; that man who gave these two harpies their awards.
It is completely irrelevant that of these two anti-abortion activists, one -- Mary Wagner -- received the medal while being imprisoned for her "civil disobedience" which Vellacott has insultingly compared to the actions of Martin Luther King, Jr. Many argue that this decision runs against the current government's hard stance on crime. That would be the political line to take as well as the wrong one.
Wagner, 38, is known to barge into abortion clinics and harass staff and awaiting patients. She does not merely stand outside with a placard, she gets in your face. Why is this an issue? Because it's downright disgusting.
All the intellectual posturing and feminizing that surrounds abortion in the media falls flat in that abortion waiting room. All the rationalization of "when does life begin?" or "Am I really 'killing' something?" is eroded by the smell of anti-septic. The fact of the matter is that suddenly, the waiting room becomes the antechamber for death.
Fine, you might not be killing a living thing, but you are killing, eliminating a potential. And while Ayn Rand -- oddly enough the everyday reading of anti-choicists Paul Ryan and Rosa Ambrose -- might argue that "Rights do not pertain to a potential," I do not believe women to be so callous as to feel nothing while about to off a potential offspring.
No amount of Mina Loy or Cindy Cisler can negate the maternal extinct that kicks in when the doctor calls your name. It might be difficult to stomach, but thousands of years of biology don't dissipate after a couple of classes on gender studies. Abortions are not easy decisions to make. They stay difficult right through to the end, and in certain cases, well after.
So for two "activists" to be rewarded for attacking women when they're at their weakest, their most vulnerable, and on top of that say that these two women are "heroines for humanity" is one of the most backwards things I have heard in recent times -- far more so than the Minister of Women Affairs voting to have a debate on when life begins.
To award these two miscreants whom Vellacott -- his name begs for a play-on-word not fit for print -- calls "precious women" is a complete and utter insult to the Diamond Jubilee medal. It is irrelevant whether or not one believes the award means anything; it's meant to be given to 60,000 Canadians who have contributed to society in a positive manner. Traumatizing women about to undergo a traumatizing operation is not a positive contribution.
And I do not very much care for the argument that the awards are given at the discretion of the MP. Because while we're at it, we might as well take a look at the Okie in question. Vellacott was educated as a pastor, is an opponent of gay marriage, argues that homosexuals wrongly blame their personal tribulations on homophobia (homophobia in the Prairies? No way!). And he also believes that the universe was created 6,000 years ago, and subscribes to intelligent design.
Not only isn't this right man to be giving away medals, this isn't the right man that a nation such as Canada, which prides itself on being the USA's more reasonable cousin, ought to have voting on life and death policies.
Suddenly, people like David Akin and Richard Mourdock aren't just names we read about in the Times, mock with our friends while drinking double-doubles, and say "Well! at least we don't have of those guys here!"
Follow Daniel Alexandre Portoraro on Twitter: www.twitter.com/dportoraro
Rev. Susan Russell: Richard Mourdock: Democracy vs. Theocracy
I just love it when lib's feign obtuseness.
It was a stupid comparison to make
And yeah, let's please not generalize about women's experience in the waiting room. Not all women seeking an abortion are at their weakest or most vulnerable, not everyone is against abortion, and I'd be interested in what you mean by "feminizing" surrounding abortion?
But thanks for criticizing this medal choice. It is good to see that even folks who are obviously pretty ambiguous about abortion itself agree that these women are not exactly equivalent to MLK.
P.S. No one has any idea - nor should they - abut how a woman feels "in the waiting room." Please refrain author from further prescribing to women how they should, or what you think they feel, about the decision to end a pregnancy.
People who manifest the worst of human traits often flatter themselves that "everybody is just like me", and they're "just more open about it" which makes them more "honest" and therefore more admirable. I suppose they need some kind of self-deception to be able to sleep at night.
but, thanks for speaking "our" minds for us. Anyone who really cares what a woman "needs" at that horrific moment... who has stopped thinking of the financial burden they will avoid (the irresponsible/selfish partner or parents, maybe?) or the hefty payout they will be given (the providers, anyone?)... who really cares how she feels when she is left to pretend that this procedure is not contrary to what ALL science knows to be fact--a real living being is about to be violently ripped from her... that's the person who knows she is in a state of desperation and on the verge of devastation. If even one cares enough about HER to willingly tell her "what you choose matters, and these others are not thinking of YOU, only themselves," then, she may finally be able to CHOOSE FREELY the last lifeline that might save her from a lifetime of sorrow and regret, and give her child a chance at life. If that is what you mean by "backward" and "anti-feminist", I guess I suffer from the same brand of anti- feminism. It's just too bad that, as a WOMAN, I am clearly not capable of being as "evolved" on women's issues as you. I guess I'd have to become a MAN to finally "get it"! Gee, I am soooo surprised! -Melody
If you can't take your decision being questioned, then perhaps you shouldn't be in an abortion clinic.
But, that said, Mary Wagner does trespass, and she does get in peoples' faces. You know, and people that break the law and invade places where they are not wanted are terrible. Such things are not acceptable, even in the southern USA. Ask Rosa Parks. (look her up)
I notice you mention "these two anti-abortion activists", but attack only Wagner.
You don't want to talk about Linda Gibbons, do you?
Ms. Gibbons has spent a cumulative ten years (that's ten YEARS) in jail for the simple act of standing outside clinics with a sign. She does not accost anyone, harass anyone, or get in anyone's face; she simply exercises her right to free speech.
Ten years.
Her persecution is reminiscent of deTouqueville's description of the "tyranny of the majority", and it is not even a majority in this country. Well over half the women in Canada want some limits on abortion.
http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/07/04/new-poll-shows-most-canadians-support-abortion-with-some-restrictions/
Any Canadian worthy of the name should be defending Ms. Gibbons, and awarding her, at least, this prize would be recognition of her as a victim of political correctness gone mad.
Ms. Gibbons was arrested for violating a permanent injunction issued by a Canadian Court. The injunction, which restricted her freedom of speech, was found to be constitutionally valid by the Supreme Court.
Living in a free and democratic society entails respecting your fellow citizens and respecting the law of the land. There are other fora for Ms. Gibbons to express her faith and her moral views.
For Mr. Vellacott to award her a medal is not to condone some moral views: it is to condone civil disobedience.
As for your comparison with the Civil Rights Movement, I shall only say that its apples and oranges. On one side, we have the oppression of part of a minority by a majority. On the other, we have the State granting women autonomy over their reproductive system. Would you care to defend your point?
As for Linda Gibbons, she purposely ignores injunctions against demonstrating near abortion clinics, the reason they have injections is often because of death threats of bomb threats against the clinics. She also refuses to pay bail to get out of prison, not because she can't pay but because she is playing the martyr.
Maybe they should give this award to Clifford Olsen as well?
You do understand that Olsen was a man that raped, tortured and murdered eleven children....then spent his time in prison taunting their parents by phone and mail whenever he could get away with it.
And you are putting him on the same level as a woman that has trespassed and challenged people vocally.........and that is it.
And you are putting him on the same level as a woman that has served ten years in jail for simply standing on the street, exercising her right to free speech by praying and holding a sign.
You should be ashamed of yourself.
Incorrigible is not the word I would use....incorrigible hints at some intelligence.
Noun:
Exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally.
Synonyms:
exaggeration - hyperbola - overstatement
These women sound like fanatical bullies bordering on domestic terrorists.
They most certainly should not be honored with a prestigious award. Now the value of a diamond jubilee medal is diminished.
I do take issue with your assertion that the termination of a pregnancy is always difficult psychologically and that, when in the waiting room of a clinic your "maternal instinct" would kick in. That isn't neccessarily true for everyone, but the bottom line is that it also doesn't matter. Painting women who choose an abortion as vulnerable, tragic figures is almost as damaging as demonizing them, because it generalizes a deeply personal experience and comes across as abortion apology.
The fact is, women choose abortion for a million reasons, some of which are easier for us to swallow than others, and their reasons are no one's business but their own. Whether or not a woman regrets her decision, thinks about the killing of a living organism (the collection of cells aborted is almost always "alive", it just isn't a "baby" yet), or feels sad, is not important. The important thing is that she had the right to make that decision, no matter her reason.
In Canada, the right to choose is protected by the law, and the duo who received this dubious honour from the Creationist (call a spade a spade) Vellacott infringed on the dignity of the women in those waiting rooms, and broke the law in both spirit and, in at least one case, in deed.
As far as the MP goes, he has tirivialized the awarding of these medals and for what they stand. They are a real threat to the well being of this nation and need to be continued to be exposed for what they are, fanatics, with a Dark Ages ideology, that if it was able to penetrate our national pysche, would drive is into another age of ignornance and fear.
I have said it before and I will say it again, I served 25 years in the Canadian Navy and know that the women with whom I served were just as capable of doing an equal or better job then their male colleagues. The fact we have to battle over this again shows how much work is still needed to be done to push these primitives and their opinions, of the main stage and back in the shadows where they belong.
But would you mind elaborating on
"In fact, I believe that we are all against abortion"