04.07.2010 08:22 AM

The “strategy” that isn’t

The Reformatories believe they will attract Catholics and “traditional” Christians to their side of the ballot with their retrograde policies on maternal health. They won’t. Notwithstanding Hilary Clinton’s statements on the issue, or the fact that every single Conservative MP showed their utter disdain for the health of women in the Third World, what matters is this: the Harper regime has grossly miscalculated, here.  As a pro-choice Catholic, I can state that they will pay a political price for it.

**

Catholic group urges PM to include abortion in G8 initiative

Source: The Canadian Press

Apr 7, 2010 8:10
TORONTO  – A Catholic group is calling on Prime Minister Stephen Harper to include family planning in a G8 initiative on maternal and child health.

In a letter to Harper, the group Catholics for Choice argues that access to abortion services is a basic human right and a matter of social justice.

The group adds that maternal mortality can be alleviated through wide access to reproductive health care services.

Harper has so far refused to include abortion in his initiative on maternal health to be presented at the G8 summit in Huntsville, Ont., in June.

Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff said in late March that this stance has turned into an international embarrassment for Canada.

The federal government says contraception will be part of the G8 initiative but that it won’t re-open the abortion debate.

INDEX: HEALTH NATIONAL POLITICS

19 Comments

  1. Spalin says:

    I find it highly unlikely that any campaign will be fought over weather Canada should be funding abortions in third-world countries. If it is, I don’t see the Liberals making any hay out of this issue, they’re just as split on the issue as the Conservatives are.

  2. wes werkman says:

    “As a pro-choice Catholic”? One of those excludes the other.

  3. MississaugaPeter says:

    Both my parents, who voted Liberal last election, who despise Harper for all the right reasons, made it quite known at a family reunion that they will not under no circumstances be voting for Ignatieff because they felt he was pushing abortion. In their opinion, there is a difference between choice and actively pushing abortion (what they consider Ignatieff is doing)

    This splinter group you refer to has no great following like Archbishop Collins:

    http://www.catholicregister.org/content/view/3853/849/

    You are often right in many things, but your opinion on this issue is similar to most of the folks around you, and as a result is biased.

    This issue not only resonates with many Catholics and other Christian groups, but also many first generation Canadian families from Asia and Africa. The Sikh community is strongly against this issue and thus it will probably wipe out any chance Ruby Dhalia had of being re-elected. I suggest you call a few to prove me wrong.

    Chrétien handled this issue very well.

    I strongly believe that Harper will garner more votes over this issue than the Liberals will. You know that he only needs 40% of the vote and more than 40% of the Canadian population is against this issue. The rest are split between two or more parties (depending on the province). My parents will probably now abstain from voting Liberal, even though their MP is one of those who did not vote with Ignatieff.

  4. Suzanne says:

    You don’t need abortion for health.

    Abortion doesn’t heal. It doesn’t treat. It is a solution to a personal problem, not a medical one.

    Feminism is an ideology. It does not represent women. Most women would beg to differ that refusing to fund abortion is a show of misogyny.

    Catholics for a Free Choice is not a Catholic group. Every educated Catholic knows that. If you don’t represent Church teaching, you’re not a Catholic.

    The proof is in the pudding. The Liberals’ slide to the left, and the growing conservatism of Catholics was an important factor in the election of a Conservative government. Just accept the facts.

    Going left on the issues will just alienate them. And a lot of other Canadians.

    The abortion vote grab is not working.

  5. MCBellecourt says:

    Split they may be on the funded abortion issue, but the maternal health initiative is about the overall picture of maternal health, and both parties arguing about abortion are shooting themselves in the foot here. The focus should be put on ALL aspects of maternal health, INCLUDING the option of PREVENTING PREGNANCY AND DISEASE.

    And, while there may be MPs who are divided on the issue, this is not about THEM. This is about WOMEN AND CHILDREN IN THIRD WORLD COUNTRIES.

    I say to all the parties. S*** or get off the pot. You represent CANADA, not YOURSELVES. This is what WE pay YOU to do. Each and every MP and each and every political party in Canada has a DUTY to work cooperately in this initiative, and I, as a taxpayer, expect no less.

    Lose the partisanship and get to work.

  6. Michael S says:

    As I fully expect the “can’t be Pro-Choice and Catholic both” crowd to show up, here is some benefit of a Jesuit education.*

    Catholic theology sees conscience as “a judgment of reason which at the appropriate moment enjoins a person to do good and to avoid evil.”

    “Catholics are called to examine their conscience daily, and with special care before confession.”

    In current Catholic teaching, “man has the right to act according to his conscience and in freedom so as personally to make moral decisions. He must not be forced to act contrary to his conscience. Nor must he be prevented from acting according to his conscience, especially in religious matters”.

    All three quotes are direct quotes from the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

    Being pro-choice and Catholic is not only possible, it is mandated through judgement of reason.

    *The education came from Jesuit seminarians, who were my roommates. I learned far more over beer in the kitchen than I could ever learn in University.

  7. Jon Evan says:

    What is sad here is the LPC dividing Canadians on the issue of funding third world abortions. Reform-Liberal MP Keith Martin is the only mature member of your party who at least is inclusive. Also, sad is your put down Warren of people like me. You’re not going to build a larger net by your put down of using quotation marks calling me “traditional” which is offensive as quotation marks always are as if I’m somehow a lesser human being (a retrograde) because I don’t believe in abortion. I’m glad I wasn’t aborted. Perhaps you disagree?

  8. Sandra says:

    Being pro-choice is not being pro-abortion. It means there are circumstances wherein health issues, etc. are involved. It means pro-choice if necessary.

    I’m sick and tired of the pro-life people being so ignorant of the realities of life.

    I’m pro-choice, but personally I don’t think I could have an abortion. But who the hell do the churches, pro-lifers, et al think they are telling people what they should and shouldn’t do without knowing the “individual” circumstances?

    • jon evan says:

      Sandra, you miss the point of this thread! We are saying fine send your money to fund third world abortions if it’s so dear to you, but don’t tell me I need to do the same thing with my tax money! And if I don’t agree with you don’t do the Leftist thing by taking a nasty swipe at me personally by calling me retrograde, “traditional” or as you do “ignorant”. Who do YOU think you are?

  9. Sean says:

    Ignatieff is the only one “paying a price” on this issue. The OECD says Canada’s economic recovery is the best in the G7… Meanwhile, Ignatieff wants to talk about spending tax dollars on 3d world abortions… This is so far off the radar screen for most people, its just embarrassing.

  10. Jan says:

    Maternal health is Harper’s initiative, not Ignatieff’s. Harper, without understanding the issue thought he could score a few points with the base and women by bringing it forward. He doesn’t seem to understand that there’s a whole Women’s Health movement – active for a decade – that are not going to tolerate picking and choosing what rights he thinks women should be entitled to. He needs to get with the program or get really beaten up at the G8/20.

    • MCBellecourt says:

      …and while Harper gets beaten up at the G8/20, those of us who did not vote for his party need not be embarrassed. What needs to be done is to find a way to get the non-Cons on the same page so we can vote them out of office. If it means voting strategically, so be it–but the Cons have gotta go.

      “Getting with the program” means compromise, and Harper is completely and utterly incapable of grasping the concept of “compromise”.

  11. Squiggy says:

    A pro-choice catholic is an oximoron and God knows the liberal party harbors a good many oximorons

    • Warren says:

      Dude, if you’re going to throw around “oxymoron,” I’d recommend spelling it properly. Capitalization and punctuation are nice, as well.

  12. Elizabeth says:

    Better to have oxymorons than morons.

    I thought it was just a simple matter of separation of church and state.

    Trudeau, or one of the Catholic PMs said that he does not govern only Catholics; he governs the entire country.

  13. Elizabeth says:

    I’m just reading G.K. Chesterton’s “Father Brown” detective stories – in which he comments that the Catholic church is wedded to common sense. It is common sense to provide access to safe abortions, and contraceptives, when you consider the cost of not providing those services.

    It seems very much that Harper’s whole stance is based on his religion; and that makes no sense at all except to him.

Leave a Reply

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


*