DAMMIT JANET!

Remember the dignity of your womanhood ...

noreply@blogger.com (deBeauxOs) — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 20:41:00 +0000

Aww, fuck it. Here's that notorious pic of MP Shelly Glover.

MP Glover is a CONtempt Party Attack Parrot™© and she serves well in that capacity since she is too stoopid to do much else.

Today she stood up in Parliament and shrieeekkked that the NDP was "anti-Canada".

Savour the irony.

The full quote from the post title comes from Christabel Pankhurst:

Remember the dignity of your womanhood. Do not appeal do not beg do not grovel. Take courage join hands stand beside us fight with us.

How Conveeeenient

noreply@blogger.com (fern hill) — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 20:38:00 +0000

On May 27, shortly after the federal election last year, we blogged on the Knights of Columbus.

At their 108th Ontario State Convention in Toronto on May 22nd, the Ontario Knights unanimously passed a resolution “to work with a Member of Parliament to introduce a Parliamentary Bill seeking the restoration of full legal protection for the lives of the unborn.”

Hm, Stephen Woodworth is an Ontario Catholic.

Does he have any connection to the KoC? From his about page, yes, indeed he does.

Over the years Stephen has also had the privilege of assisting many local organizations as a Board member or advisor. He was elected a School Trustee in Kitchener in 1994, 1997 and 2000, served on the board of Big Brothers, volunteered regularly with the Knights of Columbus and has been a lector at his church since 1967.

'Volunteering regularly' sounds kinda distant and benign, like volunteering regularly at a food bank or something. But you know, not actually involved or a member or . . .

Oh. Wait. He is a member. (Quite the list there, including Samuel Alito, John Boehner, and Canadian MPs Denis Coderre and Rob Nicholson.)

Seems the Knights found their MP and he's one of them.

Would some enterprising journo please ask Mr Woodworth about this?

Again -- Respectfully -- WHY?

noreply@blogger.com (fern hill) — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 18:58:00 +0000

On CBC Radio's The Current* this morning, stand-in host Jim Brown interviewed MPs Stephen Woodworth and Brad Trost and Star Parliamentary reporter Tonda MacCharles.

While Woodworth weaselled around about his Private Member's Motion to have a 'respectful' dialogue on when life begins, aka Opening the Abortion Debate That No One Wants Opened, he failed again to answer the basic question of 'Why?'

Brown didn't press very hard, but to be fair, his interest wasn't in the debate as such but in a political analysis of what trying to open it may mean.

The segment started with about five reiterations of Stevie Peevie using his patronizing-a-four-year-old voice on 'I've been very clear. . . yadayada . . . will not reopen' schtick. Then Woodward came on to say basically nothing.

Then a little introduction to Trost and his desire for martyrdom in the form of airing his own notions as opposed to the rigorously enforced Contempt Party talking-points.

Trost came on live to witter on about his own interest in reopening the debate. Brown prodded him about what his fellow caucus members think of his going off-message. More bafflegab about respecting everybody . . . (I had sorta stopped listening by then, to tell the truth.)

Then MacCharles came on to reassure us that Stevie Peevie really really really means it about not reopening the debate and everybody should just relax.

OK, then. I wasted half an hour of my life on that.

Regular readers know that we here at DJ! trust the Contempt Party about as far as we could throw Rob Ford. In fact, we're devoted to keeping vigilant guard on the Hidden Agenda Watch.

So are we reassured?

Nope.

We think a debate, however respectful, is a total waste of time, money, and patience. Remember, if this motion passes, what amounts to a Standing Committee on Abortion will be formed to listen to windbags like Charles McVety opine. Plus a whole host of the usual suspects like R.E.A.L. Women, Campaign Lie, etc.

And politicians don't become politicians unless they looove the sound of their own voices, so the pols will dive in enthusiastically and we'll have a Parliamentary circus like this, with the elected equivalents of Twatsy running their mouths.

We've asked before and we'll ask -- respectfully -- again: Why do we need this debate?

If Stephen Woodworth can provide one reason for it, one injustice that would be righted, one social problem that would be clarified, then fine, bring it on.

But this appears to be the best he's got.

Members of Parliament have a duty not to accept any law that says some human beings are not human.

Seriously, that's all he's got.

Here we go again. Find your MP here and shoot her or him a quick note expressing displeasure/disgust/outrage at this effort to reopen The Debate We Have Had and Settled.

If a majority of MPs vote 'yes' on Woodworth's motion, the debate will be on and it will be those MPs' fault. Tell them you'll hold them responsible.

*I'll change to a link to the podcast when it's up.

^NOT standing with Vic Toews

noreply@blogger.com (fern hill) — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 15:22:00 +0000

This is all over the toobz, but I wanted a copy here. You know, just in case.

Added by deBeauxOs:

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

Joseph Goebbels

Happy to be of service

noreply@blogger.com (fern hill) — Wed, 15 Feb 2012 15:13:00 +0000

But it looks like what DJ! offered wasn't quite what the searcher was looking for.

UPDATE from deBeauxOs: Could it be that someone in Toews' office was desperately trying to pin down who set up this Twitter account?

Toews: rhymes with knaves.

noreply@blogger.com (deBeauxOs) — Tue, 14 Feb 2012 21:04:00 +0000

Rightfully so, given the Con adulterer's disingenuous attack against critics of his bill to award police unwarranted powers to spy on ordinary, "law-abiding citizens".

Public Safety Minister Vic Toews’ attempt to demonize opponents of his new Internet law — you’re either with the government, or with the “child pornographers,” he said on Monday [...]

What a god-damned liar Toews is. Earlier this month, a co-ordinated investigation by a number of police forces in Ontario busted a child pornography network. No *special* invasive legal provisions were required to give the investigators the evidence they needed to charge 60 men with these crimes.

Insp. Scott Naylor with the OPP's child sexual exploitation unit said the accused were tracked down with software the investigators created themselves.

In addition to Alison's post at Creekside yesterday, she provides link to Open Media which has *Stop Spying* email forms directed to Cons' big guns + petition.

Creekside: Skynet - It's all about the children apparently

noreply@blogger.com (deBeauxOs) — Mon, 13 Feb 2012 21:41:00 +0000

Go read Alison at Creekside: Skynet - It's all about the children apparently if only because it's entertaining to hear the adulterer Vic Toews lecture to us about the "rights of law-abiding" citizens being subsumed to our Crusading CONtempt Party government's right to trample on our privacy.

ADDED by fh: On Twitter, Canadian Cynic linked to this oldie but goodie, when Dan Savage called for a new definition of 'Toews'. We never did settle on one, did we?

Contraception and the Culture War

noreply@blogger.com (fern hill) — Mon, 13 Feb 2012 19:41:00 +0000

Since Obama made his contraception rule 'adjustment' on Friday, there have been further developments.

The wannabe xian martyrs worked themselves into a righteous snit shrieking about 'war on religion', 'war on religious freedom', yadayada. Others called Obama a dictator. There were many raucous rounds of 'pregnancy isn't a disease, birth control isn't health care'. People flinging the word 'entitlement' around. Men -- presumably, some at least not 100% celibate or 100% gay -- were whining about fairness. And, of course, that old reliable saw 'Pay for your slutty sex yourselves, you slutty sluts!'

Our own Max Pointy couldn't resist. (Check the comments for a taste of the idiocy.)

In other words, the usual reaction to anything having to do with sex, women, and/or pregnancy and religion.

And then the Republicans fell into Obama's cunning trap. They doubled down in their opposition to accessible contraception.

Not only did they go there, they are now supporting an amendment that would allow women's employers to decide what kind of health care coverage they get.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is putting his weight behind Sen. Roy Blunt's amendment to the Affordable Care Act that would allow employers to deny coverage not just for contraception but for any treatment or any condition they claimed was contrary to their religious beliefs.

So, we go from a bunch of old guys in dresses, to a bunch of old guys in Washington, to one's own employer telling women what they can and can't do with their lady-parts.

Well-played, ReThugs! We now have you out in the open as anti-sex, anti-women, anti-healthcare, pro-employers' and -oldguysindresses' religious rights.

On a subject so uncontroversial even the political deadheads have woken up.

Like me, Andrew Sullivan is chortling.

As for politics, the Republican fusion with the Vatican is also, it seems to me, a terrible mistake for the party. Obama’s greatest skill is in getting his opponents to overreach and self-destruct. And this issue could not be more tailor-made to benefit the candidate with real potential pull with far-right-wing Catholics and evangelicals: Santorum. If the GOP really makes this issue central in the next month or so, Santorum (whose campaign claims to have raised $2.2 million in the two days following his victories last week) is by far the likeliest candidate to benefit. It could finally unite the Christian fundamentalist right behind him—especially since Romneycare contained exactly the same provisions on contraception that Obamacare did before last week’s compromise was announced. That’s right: Romneycare can now accurately be portrayed as falling to the left of Obamacare on the contraception issue. This could very well be the issue that finally galvanizes the religious right, especially in the South. Imagine how Santorum could use that on Super Tuesday. In fact, it could be the issue that wins him the nomination. And do you really think that would hurt Obama in the fall?

Um. I rather think not, Andrew.

And this morning, more fun stuff! Two of the five female Republican senators have broken with their party and announced that they are in favour of Obama's contraception rule.

Andrew thinks that this could be the end of the so-called culture wars. That may be waaay too much to hope for, but I think it's going to signal the end of the ReThuglican party in its current virulently misogynistic form.

The Fetus Lobby's Sanger Obsession

noreply@blogger.com (fern hill) — Sun, 12 Feb 2012 15:25:00 +0000

Speaking of Margaret Sanger, there's a twit-spat going on over this photo.

Will AUL's CEO @charmaineyoest scrub the fake Sanger pic from her website, or apologize for it?bit.ly/AEOx1G #prolife #prochoice
— Realtin Connor (@RealtinConnor) February 12, 2012

But this is the photo I found on the site.

Charmaine Yoest is a major fetus fetishist in the US, president and CEO of Americans United for Life.

Both photos look fake to me, but why? It was news to me, but not news in Sanger's well-documented life that yes, indeed, she did meet with the KKK.

In 1926, Sanger gave a lecture on birth control to the women's auxiliary of the Ku Klux Klan in Silver Lake, New Jersey. She described it as "one of the weirdest experiences I had in lecturing," and added that she had to use only "the most elementary terms, as though I were trying to make children understand." Sanger's talk was well-received by the group, and as a result, "a dozen invitations to similar groups were proffered."

The forced birth gang's obsession with Sanger is peculiar to say the least. They yammer on and on about her (nearly century-old) eugenist and racist views.

These views are a cornerstone on which they've built their racist, disgusting campaign claiming that Planned Parenthood targets African Americans for abortion, while conveniently omitting the fact that Sanger herself was opposed to it.

To get back to the photos: the only point of using them -- whether fake or real -- is the shock value because we know Sanger addressed the Ladies Auxiliary of the so-called Second KKK, which was, shockingly now, fairly mainstream.

The second Klan was a formal fraternal organization, with a national and state structure. At its peak in the mid-1920s, the organization claimed to include about 15% of the nation's eligible population, approximately 4–5 million men.

In a way though, the Fetus Lobby's pathetic Sanger obsession is emblematic of the poverty of their arguments. They are forced to lie about and distort events of 85 years ago.

Last word (for now) goes to Bernadette Wagner:

@fernhilldammit Antichoicers, locked in past, desperate to take us back to dark ages, ain't gonna win this one.Promise!#prochoice
— Bernadette Wagner (@thereginamom) February 11, 2012

ADDED from the fact-checkers in the Department of Duh: fern hill, you ijit, it's Black History Month! This comes up every fucking year. Every. Fucking. Year.

ADDED 2: Looks like the disputed photo is Photoshopped.

Antichoice resurrects lies about Margaret Sanger.

noreply@blogger.com (deBeauxOs) — Sat, 11 Feb 2012 23:51:00 +0000

Over four years ago, I wrote and posted this at Birth Pangs. It's still relevant.

Margaret Sanger: Saint or Fallen Angel?
AUGUST 15, 2007 BY DEBEAUXOS
As mentioned in a previous entry, Reverend Carlton Veazy‘s pictures can be found in the company of altered and faked photographs of Margaret Sanger, on certain websites. It appears that white-supremacy, fetus-fetishizing and/or fundamental religious websites incite their followers to express hatred towards specific targets: Reverend Veazy, Sanger, Archbishop Tutu, Maya Angelou and others.
Margaret Sanger is already dead, so that would make her physically immune to the violence and murderous hypocrisy of anti-choice terrorists. Nonetheless, they continue to slander and defame her legacy, and the competition to fabricate the most odious claims is ferocious.
If one were to borrow a tactic from the habitual sniveling and whining that transpires at the abortion-criminalizing blogs, the fetus-fetishizing message boards and the assorted hate-based sites whose members project themselves as modern martyrs to a holy cause, one could imagine that Margaret Sanger deserves to be canonized and elevated to sainthood, if her worthiness is measured against the egregious attacks upon her work.
An impressive number of fact-based, credible and authoritative accounts of Sanger’s accomplishments exist. Archival material is considerable, including a letter from Helen Keller which says, in part:
What a glow of gratification was kindled in my heart when Polly read last week the wonderful news that you had founded the Planned Parenthood Association in India! Not only have I continued to follow your work with loving admiration and expect ever greater results from your beneficence, I have also known of Nehru’s statesmanlike interest in birth-control, and now I behold you and him and Lady Rama Rau working together — a triple Hercules — for the deliverance of a land long cursed with excess of population. I cannot imagine anything more blessed happening on earth.
Spurious claims about Sanger’s work appear on the forementioned hate-mongers’ websites. In the spirit of fairness, equal consideration should be awarded to what critics claim about Mother Teresa and her work, since some imagine her to be a saint.

For example, Mother Teresa supported Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s suspension of civil liberties in India in 1975, and she accepted the Légion d’honneur in 1981 from Jean-Claude Duvalier, the homicidal right-wing dictator of Haiti. She received considerable donations from Charles Keating – who stole over $252 million US in a Savings & Loan scandal, and from Robert Maxwell – who embezzled £450 million UK from his employees’ pension funds. It was disclosed that she interceded on Maxwell’s behalf, wrote to the court to urge leniency and refused to return the money when requested by legal authorities, for reimbursing those who had been swindled.
Dr. Robin Fox, editor of the British medical journal The Lancet visited the Home for Dying Destitutes in Calcutta and described the care the patients received as “haphazard”. He observed that Mother Teresa’s order did not distinguish between curable and incurable patients, so that people who might have otherwise survived, were at risk of dying from infections and lack of treatment. Former employees claim that Mother Teresa refused to authorize the purchase of medical equipment, and that donated money was transferred to the Vatican Bank instead. There have been a series of other reports documenting inattention to health care in her facilities. And yet, that hasn’t stopped the Vatican from promoting the canonization of Mother Teresa.
Margaret Sanger’s detractors have attempted to draw a fallacious connection between her statements on negative eugenics in the 1920′s US and the barbaric genocidal policies of Third Reich Germany. Thus it might be astute to note that Joseph Ratzinger aka Pope Benedict XVI was a member of the Hitler Youth, in the interest of maintaining balance and perspective.
Those who might object to Margaret Sanger’s candidacy for sainthood should consider the question of whether allegations about her work are contrived, or as legitimate as the many concerns raised about Mother Teresa’s actions.
What distinguishes the sacredness of Margaret Sanger’s work from that of Mother Teresa’s mission is likely to be their respective motivations. Sanger stated:
Woman must have her freedom, the fundamental freedom of choosing whether or not she will be a mother and how many children she will have. … Regardless of what man’s attitude may be, that problem is hers — and before it can be his, it is hers alone. She goes through the vale of death alone, each time a babe is born. As it is the right neither of man nor the state to coerce her into this ordeal, so it is her right to decide whether she will endure it.
Loyal supporters of Mother Teresa affirm that missionary activity was the central part of her calling, and that she perceived evangelisation as her ultimate objective; providing shelter and health care were merely instruments that she exploited to achieve her stated goal of converting impoverished and vulnerable people of Hindu faith to Catholicism.
Margaret Sanger left behind a powerful legacy that is carried on by her grandson, Alexander Sanger. The photograph of his grandmother and Avabai Wadia is taken from his website.
Disclaimer: Of course we know that Margaret Sanger was an atheist and a humanitarian. She would not want to be canonized, though she was demonized enough during her lifetime by Conservative Christians who tried to discredit her work. She persevered, inspired by the memory of her own mother who died from the cumulated physical damage suffered during multiple pregnancies and the birthing of eleven children.

Caption Contest launched by CC

noreply@blogger.com (deBeauxOs) — Sat, 11 Feb 2012 18:55:00 +0000

As proposed by Canadian Cynic, find a suitable caption for the photo op above.

Mine?

Laureen: "Why do I always get stuck wrangling the animal in a photo? I told the PMO after the fake liplock in Niagara Falls that they don't pay me enough for this kind of humiliation."

ADDED: link to CC's tweet and a clever contest entry.

Postcards from China

noreply@blogger.com (deBeauxOs) — Fri, 10 Feb 2012 23:07:00 +0000

Go read Alison at Creekside: Steve flexes his sino-pecs from China.

Um, ya. Anyone taking bets on whether PMSHithead now has a deliciously plump secret account in a Swiss bank?

Martinuk: A Liar and a Cheat

noreply@blogger.com (fern hill) — Fri, 10 Feb 2012 21:17:00 +0000

Shame on the Calgary Herald for giving a platform to BIG LIES promulgated by the Fetus Lobby, namely *sigh* the 'abortion causes breast cancer' one again.

A writer named Susan Martinuk says:

This means Komen is raising money to fight breast cancer at the same time as it is handing that money to causes that appear to be a contributing cause to that very disease.

Hm. Martinuk, Martinuk, why does that sound familiar?

Oh yeah. A few weeks ago, I was spanking the scientists for hire that fetus fetishists like Maurice Vellacott rely on to spread their bullshit.

Dr Dawg left a link in the comments to some similar spanking he'd done back in July of 2008. Dr Morgentaler had just received the Order of Canada and the forced birthers were going bonkers.

Dr D. was taking this apart for its bogus science. And oh look, it's by Susan Martinuk.

On the breast cancer lie, Dr D said:

I'm amazed that this old canard still has legs, but once again our reliable JPANDS [Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons] is cited--twice! The US National Cancer Institute isn't buying it; neither is the American Cancer Society. As the ACS puts it, " the public is not well-served by false alarms and at the present time, the scientific evidence does not support a causal association between induced abortion and breast cancer."

I went to the old link to see what Martinuk had to say.

In 1996, a paper in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health provided the first real evidence of a connection between abortion and breast cancer. Pooled data from 28 different studies demonstrated that women who had abortions had increased their risk of developing breast cancer by 30 per cent.

Subsequent studies supposedly disproved this association, but a 2005 Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons paper showed these studies had methodologies that were sufficiently flawed "to invalidate their findings." And, in 2007, the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons reported that induced abortion was the risk factor that best predicted the incidence of breast cancer in European women.

I blinked at that a couple of times, then went to the new link again.

But there is an even bigger problem in Komen’s funding of Planned Parenthood. For the past 15 years, there’s been a growing controversy over the link between induced abortion and an increased risk of breast cancer. In 1996, a paper in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health provided the first evidence of a connection between abortion and breast cancer. Pooled data from 28 studies demonstrated that women who had abortions had increased their risk of developing breast cancer by 30 per cent. Subsequent studies supposedly disproved this association, but a 2005 Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons paper showed these studies had methodologies that were sufficiently flawed “to invalidate their findings.” And, in 2007, the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons reported that induced abortion was the risk factor that best predicted the incidence of breast cancer in European women.

Throw in a couple of new sentences, and presto! A timely article with all the same old discredited crap in it.

So, double shame on the Calgary Herald. Once for printing the crap. Twice for printing -- and presumably paying for -- the same crap three and a half years later.

But really, how surprised should we be that a lying liar like Martinuk is also a cheat?

War on Women: Next Phase

noreply@blogger.com (fern hill) — Fri, 10 Feb 2012 14:44:00 +0000

Our Canadian -- and non-Merkin, for that matter -- readers may not be aware of the latest misogynist insanity roiling in the Excited States.

Having crapped all over abortion rights, the Thugs are taking the next logical step. They are going after birth control.

Last year was not a great one for abortion rights. First, congressional Republicans attempted to deny statutory rape victims access to Medicaid-funded abortions (twice). Then GOP-dominated state legislatures pushed record numbers of laws limiting abortion rights, including proposals that could have treated killing abortion providers as "justifiable homicide."

Yet in the past six months, social conservatives have widened their offensive, and their new target is clear: Not satisfied with making it harder to obtain legal abortions, they want to limit access to birth control, too.

"Contraception is under attack in a way it really wasn't in the past few years," says Judy Waxman, the vice president for health and reproductive rights at the National Women's Law Center. "In 2004, we could not find any group—the National Right to Life Committee, the Bush campaign, anyone—that would go on the record to say they're opposed to birth control," adds Elizabeth Shipp, the political director for NARAL Pro-Choice America. "We couldn't find them in 2006 either, and in 2008 it was just fringe groups. In 2010, 2011, and this year, it's just exploded."

The current issue is whether employers, including Catlick universities and hospitals, must include prescription birth control in employees' health insurance without a co-pay. It's a matter of religious freedom, you see, despite the fact that 99% of Merkin women -- and 98% of Merkin Catlick women use contraception.

Amanda Marcotte nails it:

No matter what, this fight needs to be rubbed in anti-choice noses. They revealed that they're anti-sex, not pro-fetus. #neverforget
— Amanda Marcotte (@AmandaMarcotte) February 10, 2012

Make no mistake, Canadians, if we give the misogynists a centimetre on abortion rights, this is the metre they'll claim next.

UPDATE: Obama did not cave to foot-stamping bishops and misogynist thugs. White House officials are not calling this a compromise, but rather an 'accommodation'.

Under this plan, every insurance company will be obligated to provide contraceptive coverage. Administration officials stated that a woman's insurance company "will be required to reach out directly and offer her contraceptive care free of charge. The religious institutions will not have to pay for it."

Immediate reaction on Twitter: relief, disappointment that treating contraception separately is stigmatizing, and in this tweep's view well-played by Obama.

Basically, Obama got the GOP to come out hard against birth control, then yanked the rug out from under them.

As commenter k'in says: PUNKED!

By the way, the average Merkin woman will save about $600 a year under this plan.

The 'Every Sperm Is Sacred' Amendment

noreply@blogger.com (fern hill) — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 15:07:00 +0000

In Oklahoma, where legislators have been glorying in an orgy of anti-abortion bills and laws, one senator added a mocking amendment.

Anti-abortion lawmakers vowed Wednesday to continue pushing for tighter restrictions in Oklahoma as hundreds of advocates flooded the halls of the state Capitol as part of a rally to urge lawmakers to pass more anti-abortion laws.

But one Democrat, in a seeming attempt to fight the measure, added an amendment to the bill stating that “every sperm is sacred,” according to Think Progress.

State Sen. Constance Johnson, D-Oklahoma City, added language which states that masturbation and sex acts other than vaginal intercourse could be considered detrimental to unborn children as abortion.

The Oklahoma bill is, of course, part of the 'personhood' movement, an attempt to confer rights on fetuses that would effectively render women third-class citizens, after menz and baybeez. Not to mention probably outlaw IUDs, hormonal birth control, emergency contraception, and in vitro techniques.

Which is where we're going here in Canada if Stephen Woodworth is successful with his private member's motion to create a Parliamentary committee to examine when 'life begins' and thus, when a fetus has rights in competition with the incubator's, er, woman's.

Some of the boyos are all revved by this opportunity to discuss the weighty matter of when life begins. Here's a classic mansplanation on the subject, kindly supplied to me yesterday in a Twitter spat.

While sane people understand that biological life is completely irrelevant to legal personhood, that fact won't deter Woodworth's sneaky back-door attempt to muddy definitions of 'human' and 'person' and get that feverishly wished-for debate going.

We sane people will not let that happen.

We at DJ! suggest that all 'personhood' legislation be called ESIS bills. Because that's what their proponents believe.

Here's their hymn.

How Fucked Is the Liberal Party?

noreply@blogger.com (fern hill) — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 02:18:00 +0000

This fucked.

Some federal Liberals fear single-issue pro-lifers are trying to hijack their weakened party.

Their fears have been stoked by the apparent re-emergence of a group calling itself Liberals for Life, which is promoting Trifon Haitas's bid to represent the party in a March 19 by-election in Toronto-Danforth.

The nomination meeting is tomorrow, so sane Libs don't have a lot of time to counter this move. If Haitas is well-organized and brings a lot of his Fetus Lobby friends, it could be a romp for the NDP and a huge black eye for the Elite Party of Canada.

Those fetus fetishists manage to screw everything up, don't they?

Creekside: Torture : Twas brillig, saith the slithy Toews

noreply@blogger.com (deBeauxOs) — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 18:17:00 +0000

Creekside: Torture : Twas brillig, saith the slithy Toews

Go read Alison at Creekside. Go. Click on the link. NOW.

Cons for the pre-born. After? Not so much.

noreply@blogger.com (deBeauxOs) — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:49:00 +0000

A member of the NDP says the Speaker of the House of Commons, Andrew Scheer, demanded that her 3 month old infant be removed from the House before a vote in connection with the bill on the abolition of the gun registry, yesterday. The office of the Speaker refuses to confirm or deny these allegations.

The MP for Verchères-Les Patriotes, Sana Hassaina gave birth to a boy that she named Iskander-Jack, in memory of the former NDP leader. She had recently returned to work and since she is breastfeeding, her husband who is on paternity leave accompanies her to Parliament. She was warned the vote would take place and finished nursing her baby. She searched the crowded lobby for her husband but not finding him, entered the House with her infant.

Once inside, she was told by a page that the Speaker wanted the baby to leave.

News item, in Google translate.

Original version here.

The CONtempt Party that's providing one of its MPs an opportunity to explore the legal status of the unborn - and reopen the abortion debate - won't let a tiny infant stay briefly in the House while his mother votes.

"Family values" - unless it's inCONvenient.

Grand merci to lagatta who provided the original news item.

UPDATE: @vickyatclc links to this - labour standards & women breastfeeding in the workplace.

CBC coverage of incident and Speaker's denial.

Hero Initiative

noreply@blogger.com (fern hill) — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 17:39:00 +0000

This site, 'Until abortion ends' (subtitled 'a hero initiative'*) had me laughing out loud.

In a way, it's genius. It chomps down on the Merkin fetish for celebrity and offers a little piece of it to deluded young fetus fetishists in exchange for giving up something 'rilly rilly rilly important'.

Like: Coca-Cola, Pepsi, M&M's, Reese's Peanut Butter Cups, sleeping in, IPods, french fries, and coffee.

Let's get this straight. For your one minute of fame, you have to give up only one thing. So, presumably, the Coke abstainers can hit the Pepsi as hard as they want. And the M&M-deprived can switch with the peanut-butter-cup refuseniks.

I think this young woman should trade with the guy giving up coffee. She could use a little, um, pep.

*I looked up 'hero initiative' to see if it's a thing. It is.

The Hero Initiative, formerly known as A Commitment to Our Roots, or ACTOR, is the first federally recognized not-for-profit organization dedicated to helping comic book creators, writers and artists in need.

Didn't really think or google that through, did they?

ADDED: This suggestion on Twitter from CC: 'I will hold my head under water'.

Mystical Pregnancies - a gynophobic, hateful trope

noreply@blogger.com (deBeauxOs) — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 23:51:00 +0000

Feminist Frequency nails it.

Watch, listen, learn. Fundamentalist religious zealots love these.

Before we start that 'respectful' conversation, Mr Woodworth. . .

noreply@blogger.com (fern hill) — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 19:12:00 +0000

Did you have a respectful conversation with your constituents before the election about your plan to reopen the abortion debate?

Ooo. Seems not, according to local political blogger King and Ottawa.

Yet this week when directly asked if he supported a woman’s right to choose in a debate televised on Rogers TV, Woodworth refused to give a direct answer. Instead he called for a dialogue on abortion, something that Stephen Harper lead us to believe was off the table. Mike Farwell who moderated the debate picked up on this discrepancy and wrote about it on his blog.

There is no doubt about where he stands on the issue. He tweeted it earlier this year.

'My principles incline me to favour preservation and enhancemt of human life in all end of life issues.'
-- Stephen Woodworth on Twitter as preserved by Tweetcommons

His position is also on the public record thanks to Campaign Life which recommended its supporters vote for him due to his social conservative views. In the quote section, he supports the traditional definition of a family and in the questionaire section he promises to strive to introduce and pass laws to protect unborn children from the time of conception (fertilization) onward.

Supporters of his pro-life position must be concerned about his answer this week. Should they continue to support him if he isn’t going to deliver on his commitment? Or do they know something we don’t. Has Stephen Harper asked him to refrain from talking about this issue? Have Woodworth or another Tory MP been promised they can introduce the issue as a private member’s bill after they win a majority government? That is how they tried to kill the long gun registry.

And here's K&O on Woodworth's recent gambit:

Woodworth loves to play word games. I suspect he prides himself on fancy rhetorical footwork worthy of Mohamed Ali. He never allows himself to be pinned down. He bobs and weaves around just about any policy issue. Pick any issue you like and have a dialogue with him on Twitter, you’ll see exactly what I mean. He refuses to answer a direct question even when I tried to do so around his opposition to funding International Planned Parenthood and what that might mean for women in Canada. He appears to relish the type of slippery logic that gives both lawyers and politicians a bad name.

I recommend that we respond, “Even if a dialogue on when human life begins could be beneficial, we do not trust you and the Harper government to lead the dialogue and act on it. Instead, we want your government to act to eliminate poverty and prevent unexpected pregnancies both across Canada and around the world. “

“Oh, and by the way, let’s take care of the economic uncertainty!”

Your constituents don't trust you, Mr Woodworth. You got elected by people who believed that you were toeing the Contempt Party's nauseatingly oft-repeated line of 'our government will NOT open the abortion debate'.

We will not debate anyone so patently disingenuous.

Woodworth's dog & pony show.

noreply@blogger.com (deBeauxOs) — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 18:22:00 +0000

Yesterday, while Stevie's Contempt Party government fêted The Queen's Jubilee, Con MP Woodworth "went rogue".

Or at least, that's what we are meant to believe.

In which parallel universe would the MASSIVE micro-manager Harper allow a backbencher to break away from the official party line?

So, it's probably safe to assume that even if Woodworth and PMSHithead were both to claim plausible deniability regarding the K-W MP's initiative, somebody in the PMO∕Politburo had a little chat with the backbencher to map out the tactic and to rein him in if he started dancing outside those lines.

I'm listening to Radio-Canada's phone-in political program; all the callers see through this little ploy.

Let's accept, for the sake of argument, that Woodworth's project to consider the status and the wellbeing of the zygote, embryo and fetus were sincere. Why not strike a Royal Commission and consider it from that perspective, as well as examining what the quality of life should be for potential and actually born infants? But then, it would become apparent that the reformaTory imperative to control and punish women is a minority view that should not take precedence over the rational and heartfelt arguments that pro-choice organizations like the Canadian Medical Association and the Canadian Bar Association would present, as well as the perspectives multitudes of women's groups would express.

It's not happenstance that Woodworth is attacking women's right to choose through the Criminal Code. Ken Epp tried it in 2008 and Harper voted in support of his private member's bill C-484, as Hélène Buzetti reminded us.

The Harper government's agenda includes the criminalization of abortion. This is now clear, though the Cons lie about their intent. This is the first step in a campaign strategy based on the incremental erosion of women's access to contraception and the right for each woman to stop a pregnancy or to carry it to term.

Human zygote, embryo, fetus are potential human beings. During gestation, pregnant women give life. They are not passive breeders. The Cons want to use the Criminal Code to award nascent beings rights that will trump those of pregnant women.

We will not let them do this.

UPDATE: Parliamentary procedural information from Kady O'Malley, here.

Lying and Withholding Info to Prevent Abortion? Yay!

noreply@blogger.com (fern hill) — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 17:59:00 +0000

Gotta love Kansas. They're working on a bill to make it okey-dokey for doctors to lie to women seeking abortion and withhold medical information from them.

A Kansas House committee is scheduled to take up a bill Wednesday that would exempt doctors from malpractice suits if they withheld medical information to prevent an abortion. The measure would also take away tax credits for abortion providers, remove tax deductions for the purchase of abortion-related insurance coverage and require women to hear the fetal heartbeat. The bill includes several provisions, which passed in other states and now face federal lawsuits. The bill would also require women be told about potential breast cancer risks from abortions, even though medical experts discount such a connection.

Well, sorry, Kansas, Onion News has gone even further.

In other Onion-related news, the dickwad congressscritter who recently fell for last May's Abortionplex story is a medical doctor!!!!!

And, according to Literally Unbelievable, at the moment the Onion story sucking in the most ijits is
Brain-Dead Teen, Only Capable of Rolling Eyes and Texting, to be Euthanized.

Yep, Kulta Warz in the Excited States. You can't tell the wingnutz from the braindead.

Oh. Wait.

The Hidden Agenda decloaks.

noreply@blogger.com (deBeauxOs) — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 06:51:00 +0000

One wonders if Stephen Woodworth has been given explicit or implicit permission by the Contempt Party and Stevie's "strong stable mandate" to use an official government media room for his February 6 event.

More about those fetus fetishizing *Hidden Agenda* balloons that Con MPs have been testing out.

Grand merci to @goddamitkitty's tweet.

UPDATE: Kady O'Malley covered Woodworth's "happening" which was competing with the Harper government's ballyhoo for The Queen's Jubilee™©.

Oh Snap! Alison at Creekside on Ari, abortion, and alternate universes

noreply@blogger.com (deBeauxOs) — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 03:51:00 +0000

Go, go, go. Read Alison at Creekside: Ari, abortion, and alternate universes.

Lots of smackdown and linky goodness.

DAMMIT JANET!

Remember the dignity of your womanhood ...

How Conveeeenient

Again -- Respectfully -- WHY?

^NOT standing with Vic Toews

Happy to be of service

Toews: rhymes with *knaves*.

Creekside: Skynet - It's all about the children apparently

Contraception and the Culture War

The Fetus Lobby's Sanger Obsession

Antichoice resurrects lies about Margaret Sanger.

Margaret Sanger: Saint or Fallen Angel?

Caption Contest launched by CC

Postcards from China

Martinuk: A Liar and a Cheat

War on Women: Next Phase

The 'Every Sperm Is Sacred' Amendment

How Fucked Is the Liberal Party?

Creekside: Torture : Twas brillig, saith the slithy Toews

Cons for the pre-born. After? Not so much.

Hero Initiative

Mystical Pregnancies - a gynophobic, hateful trope

Before we start that 'respectful' conversation, Mr Woodworth. . .

Woodworth's dog & pony show.

Lying and Withholding Info to Prevent Abortion? Yay!

The *Hidden Agenda* decloaks.

Oh Snap! Alison at Creekside on Ari, abortion, and alternate universes

Toews: rhymes with knaves.

The Hidden Agenda decloaks.