Stephen Harper has been told by his advisers that he must avoid social issues if he is to win the election and, horror, unborn children were mentioned twice in the past seven days.
Pesky little things. Why can't they just agree to being slaughtered and stop muddying the waters of Canadian politics ...
Of course, Coren's whining about Bill C-484, which the Tories have suddenly decided to stop supporting because it is now a political liability.
These current mentions are tenuous at best. In a desperate attempt to make the prime minister look like the president, Stephane Dion asked Harper where he stood on abortion. A sordid attack.
Is it such a "sordid" thing, Michael? The Leader of the Opposition has asked our Prime Minister to state what his position on the subject is. It doesn't take a genius to suspect that there's an inconsistency or two between Harper's statements and his support for Bill C-484. I think what is far more significant is Harper's outright refusal to answer a simple question.
Even though Harper has proposed alternative legislation on the issue that is insultingly weak, he and his party are still held up as vile fundamentalists who want to force women barefoot into the kitchen.
Something I've never understood in that when my wife is making dinner I'd far rather she wore shoes. Choice, however, is apparently all important in this discussion so I shan't dictate footwear.
How generous of you Mr. Coren. I'm sure your wife appreciates your magnamity in the matter.
Harper hasn't proposed any legislation yet - there's no government bill before the house to replace C-484, and the Con$ don't seem overly interested in promoting C-537, which would do the correct thing in the first place.
Thing is, almost every survey shows that at least 50% of Canadians are opposed to abortion.
Really? Let me see if I get the reasoning here correct. Even if I accept the assertion that 50% of Canadians are opposed to abortion, since when does that have anything to do with an individual woman's right to make that decision for herself? There are lots of life decisions that people make that others would oppose. The issue around abortion is not a matter for some kind of "will of the majority" to decide. The long term, legal issue is really about a woman's access to health services in general, and reproductive health in particular. But, then again, Mr. Coren is also the same man who argues that teaching about sexuality in school is a bad thing. I suppose I should not be too surprised.
But at heart it's about doing what is right. Our beliefs regarding health care, welfare, housing, education, foreign policy and general social justice are all vital, but ultimately irrelevant if we deny the most basic right of all -- the right to life -- to the most vulnerable.
Perhaps, Mr. Coren, you would do better to argue about what is right for yourself, and let others lead their lives in a safe, peaceful manner. But thank you for admitting by your own reasoning that C-484 really is about abortion, and that the Fetus Fetishist crowd really is all about regulating everybody else's sex lives.