10.05.2017 01:20 PM

Abortion and politics, apparently

Apparently PC MPP Lisa MacLeod invoked my name in a scrum over at Queen’s Park this morning.  Apparently it came up because she was denouncing the abortion-related trap the Ontario Libs had apparently set for the Ontario PCs.  Apparently she said it was the kind of thing I would do.

The following aren’t apparent, they’re manifest (look it up):

  1. Notwithstanding what Coyne et al. think, the nation’s highest court settled abortion in 1988.  The Supremes pronounced on the matter.  They said politicians could pass a new law if they wanted to. The politicians didn’t.  So, that’s that.  The absence of an abortion law is the law.
  2. Ipso facto (that’s me being lawyerly), it’s all a phoney debate, as Holden Caulfield would say.  It’s moot.  There’s nothing that any politician can say, at any level, that will meaningfully change the reality.
  3. Yasir Naqvi this week said that women seeking abortions should “have the right to access abortion services safely and securely with their privacy maintained, free from any intimidation or interference.” I support that.  However, I wish he would extend the same protections to those of us wishing to be free of the ongoing “intimidation and interference” of the racist, homophobic, Holocaust-denying neo-Nazi rag, Your Ward News.  But I’m not holding my breath.
  4. The abortion thing is about politics, not the law.  The Libs indeed set a trap for the Tories, as MacLeod claimed.  The best thing the Tories could do, therefore, is to not fall into the trap by talking about abortion instead of jobs and the economy and hydro and whatnot.  Patrick Brown didn’t fall for it, just as he didn’t fall for the Islamophobia motion trap.
  5. My name ain’t on any ballot, Lisa.  No one cares about me anymore.  Leave me alone with my punk rock records and memories of six back-to-back majorities.

(Well, apparently.  The last majority came up short by one damn seat.  But the other five – in 1993, 1997, 2000, 2003 and 2007 – were pretty good.

And there’s nothing apparent about them!)

4 Comments

  1. JH says:

    Interesting stuff being played out on the Federal scene as well with the Rachel Harder case. Question most often asked in Timmy’s is would the Libs deny a lady of the Islamic faith the right to chair that committee? Seems this feminist thing is only about an inch deep with the PMO crowd.
    Because it’s 2017?

    • Derek Pearce says:

      If a woman of Islamic faith were anti-choice yer darn tootin’ they’d deny it to her. If she was pro-choice, smooth sailing. That simple. And the Conservatives could harp on about what a bad idea this is and tar themselves with the same anti-immigrant brush they have since the niquab-and-snitch-lines-hysteria of the last election.

  2. doconnor says:

    Saying the politicians could pass a new law is a good definition of not settled. They did try and pass one, but it died due to a tie vote in the Senate.

    I’m not sure how you could take her statement as anything other then a compliment.

  3. Bud McFarthy says:

    Probably still upset about the cookies thing. Has it been 10 years?!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*