Attack of the Zygoteers

[This post by PSA moved up here just cuz it really needs some top-level exposure, and LuLu and I can take a break for a while. -- CC]

The National Poo is featuring a full week of Fetus Fetish Falsehoods and Fuckery. Yesterday they featured speech writer and war criminal by association, a man bathed in the blood of innocents, dirty David Frum. Today it is the hypocrisy and lies of Barbara Kay, weeping for all of the zygotian nation, a woman whose moral compass has no needle. Why it was less than two weeks ago that she was just all in favour of taking some lives.

As one of the lonely few in Canada - in the whole Western world nowadays outside of the U.S. - who never stopped believing in the justice of the death penalty, I have often pondered the methods of execution I could feel morally comfortable with.

Oh fuck off. Shorter Babs: Women, you should not be allowed to determine the fate of your own uterus because killing is so very wrong, bad sinners, bad. Now excuse me while I dream of my bestest favourite way to murder bad people.

So Babs, you mentally desiccated slag, let's have a peek at your finely honed argument, beginning with the title "20 Years of Silence". Since fucking when have the anti-choice brigades been silent? They are not silent in front of the hospital up the street from me. The rotten old bastard screaming "whore" at young women on certain days of the month isn't silent. Suzie All-Caps and her thrice daily repetitions of the anti-autonomy screed and creed sure isn't silent. Five Fetus of Fetish is a barking loon, utterly unfamiliar with silence and you, you fatuous bag of weeping methane, are part of a full week of lies and posturing in a national paper. Onward.

In the new movie Juno, a pregnant teen declines the easy abortion route, bravely choosing adoptive parents for her baby. In another recent movie, Knocked Up, a young woman decides to keep the baby she conceived with a one-night stand. The plots are otherwise dissimilar, but both implicitly present as sympathetic those girls and women who don't abort their accidental babies.

Um, whuthefuck? Babs honey, didn't you get the memo? Hollywood is the home of the evil, sinful liberal conspiracy leading the youth into a maelstrom of carnality and sin. But what's not to sympathize, people are faced with difficult choices all the time. And really, it is that special word that is most important in these arguments...choice. These fictional characters made their choices for their own reasons. Having worked in the film industry for a decade and having read dozens and hundreds of scripts, I can let you in on a Hollywood secret. Protagonists are generally sympathetic characters.

Of course, these are American movies. No Hollywood producer would dare risk his movie's profits by offending the huge pro-life bloc of the movie-going population. But at least the thorny subject of abortion can be addressed in American culture

Leaving aside the very Canadian pedigree of "Juno" (fuckwit), the more likely assertion is that no Hollywood producer would risk the safety of his family or business by inciting the wrath of the lunatic, bomb planting, arsonist psychotics that populate that special and dubious segment of the film going audience. Just as it is a risk making a film that contradicts the fantastical notions of the religiously zealous freaks that will picket and decry works of art without having any need to actually witness them. After all, the magically deranged know eeevil when they don't see it. In the great history of Hollywood's famous evil influence, I can't think of a movie off the top of my head that portrays a woman or girl having an abortion. Let alone treating such a character with sympathy or treating the issue lightly.

Let the high dive into the deep end of the stupid pool commence...

Whether one sees him as a great humanitarian (that is certainly how he sees himself ) or a monster -- in The Beaver magazine's poll of the "worst Canadian," he ranked "worse" than Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka -- one of Henry Morgentaler's achievements cannot be gainsaid: He effectively eliminated abortion as an issue for public policy debate in Canada.

The Beaver Poll?!? Oh sweet rat fucking Jeebus. Does the Post not employ an editor of any sort? The freeping Beaver Poll! I guess when the week long silence is going down, having any shred of credibility comes second to parading whatever lie is convenient. The abortion debate has been ongoing ever since R v. Morgentaler. Our very own Conservative government is populated with a scattering of fundaholic goobers that openly campaign against reproductive freedom of choice.

Since the 1988 Supreme Court of Canada decision vindicating Morgentaler and decriminalizing all manner of abortion, a political chill descends whenever the subject is broached. In the last federal election, Paul Martin exploited the fear of an abortion ban to demonize Stephen Harper, who pointedly distanced himself from any challenge to the existing non-law.

Perhaps that "chill" has more to do with the false premise that Kay's editorial and this week of, um, silence is operating under. The majority of Canadians do not, in fact, support a ban on abortion. The majority of Canadians support the right of a woman to choose for herself whether to carry a pregnancy to term or not. The majority of Canadians prefer individual autonomy over false, moralizing and brow beating by a herd of Christers, prigs and SoCon nannies.

And when Conservative MP Rob Merrifield suggested pregnant girls might benefit from pre-abortion counselling, feminists tore a strip off him, urging women not to vote Conservative on that basis alone. Other politicians took the hint and kept shtumm.

Oh, and isn't that a precious re-casting of reality? Let's see what spurred this little white lie by omission...

A suggestion by the federal Conservative health critic -- that women considering abortion should be required to seek counselling first -- has forced the party to tackle the hot-button issue.
In an interview with The Globe and Mail, Rob Merrifield said he thought mandatory counselling would be "valuable" for women who are considering terminating their pregnancies.

Somehow mandatory and requirement were replaced by suggested. Magic folks, the magical powers of bullshit and fibbery. But maybe Steve muzzled his own party's zealots because he was hungry for power and he knew that Canadians would not elect an openly backwards pack of fundies.

.

..68% of Canadians who in a 2004 poll said they wanted legal protection for fetuses at some point in their development.

The poll that must be so very true that it doesn't require a citation, such is the weight of its very true truth.

Canadians should be informed that the Morgentaler decision produced disturbing outcomes. But there is no public forum to discuss them. Here are two of the many resulting media orphans:
1) Young women today are more careless about becoming pregnant, indicating an increasing psychological desensitization to the creation of new life. For example, in 1988, 16% of pregnancies in Quebec, Canada's most abortion-friendly province, resulted in abortion. Today, 30% do. Girls are using abortion -- tax-funded and easily available -- as an alternative form of birth control. No morally aspirational society should feel complacent abetting this trend.

Yes, the woman taking part in a week long weep in the pages of a national paper must be right. There is simply no forum for discussion of this issue. You won't find a peep about it online anywhere. And it certainly isn't being dealt with on the streets, on billboards, on the bus I ride to work every day, in regular marches and protests or on demonstrations on Parliament Hill sanctioned by the Federal Government. Nope. Silence. As for the dubious stats, again without citation, maybe the increased access to clinical abortion has had something to do with a statistical increase and perhaps there are now fewer unwanted children in the system.

2) A less predictable outcome (in Canada, at any rate) was, with access to early and improved ultrasound technology, the use of abortion for gender selection -- a popular strategy amongst cultural groups that privilege male children. If even the women's rights-obsessed Morgentaler balks here -- "It seems a bit awkward to eliminate a fetus on the basis of gender," he said in an interview -- there can't be many who would support it, or at least not on the basis of women's rights. Yet it remains perfectly legal.

Less predictable indeed. Maybe because that is a line of unsupported bullshit. What Kay is trying to say is that it's those baby murdering foreigners in their hijabs. Of course the suggestion that it occurs is sufficient, there need not be any actual proof of it occurring. But fact and context are alien to the anti-choice argument.

Abortion is like medicare: Both need a policy change, but for no logical reason an old template has evolved into such a sacred national cow that their respective ideological guardians are able to drown out reasonable voices.

Yeah. Fucking majority of Canadians and their unreasonable protection of rights and freedoms. Don't they see that Babs Kay and the praise teams know what's best for them and their innards? That old template of self determination and bodily autonomy has to change. Trust Babs, she knows what's good for you.

When suggestions are put forward for reform of either, all we hear is a panicky "two-tier medicine!" or "a woman's right to choose!" as if reform of the one will lead to all poor cancer victims being left to die at home, and reform of the other will result in raped women driven to back-alley abortionists. Such fears are absurd on both fronts.

Yeah, bitches. Because if we went to a two-tier system, that doesn't mean that the poor and uninsured would be dumped in alleys like those incidents in L.A. And dialing back the clock on reproductive rights won't cause the return of the butchery that used to exist. No relationship between the two. Trust Babs, I dare ya. What a noxious load this Babs is peddling. And one wonders where that majority of Canadians are that support this twaddle pot and her fictions. Well look no further, there is an entire one comment on her piece. Let's see who's on her side.

by Monik05
Jan 23 2008
2:15 Pm
It is interesting to realize, even if the fact in itself is sad, that there is indeed a link between the contraception mentality and the abortion. Some people, more than forty years ago, saw it coming and dared to predict it. There were targeted as alarmists and with the litany of anti-everything. Statistics are now proving that these “visionaries” were indeed right on. In one case and the other, it is the notion of life that is cheapened. We, as nation, have clearly shifted to a culture of death. It is time to discuss openly if this is the pitiful inheritance we want to legate to our future generations.

Ah, I see. The intelligentsia has rallied to support the reasonable argument put forward by Barbara Kay, propped up with half truth and outright lies. Let's go to the machines and see where this all registers...



...as I thought, Bullshit, it is.