2.03.2010

ignatieff to harper: women are people, don't follow u.s. example

You know I'm no fan of Michael Ignatieff (although I fervently hope he'll be our next Prime Minister, and soon). But Ignatieff did the right thing yesterday, and deserves credit for that.

In this case it's the right thing for Canada, and a shrewd move for the Liberals, shining on one of the Conservatives' major political weaknesses.
Michael Ignatieff is urging Prime Minister Stephen Harper not to exclude abortion and contraception from his plan to become an international champion of women's and children's health.

The Liberal leader sought assurances Tuesday that Harper's agenda to improve the lot of women and children in the world's poorest countries will include funding for all reproductive health services.

"Women are entitled to the full gamut of reproductive health services and that includes termination of pregnancy and contraception," Ignatieff told a Liberal-sponsored roundtable discussion on foreign aid and international development.

Harper is hosting the G8 summit in June and he's vowed to use the opportunity to launch a major initiative to improve the health of women and children.

Ignatieff urged the Harper government not to follow the lead of the United States, which in the past has cut funding to some aid organizations that promote the use of contraceptives and abortion.

The Liberals subsequently issued a news release expressing fear that Harper is already going down the American path. It cited a petition filed in the House of Commons by Conservative MP Brad Trost urging the government to cut funding to the International Planned Parenthood Federation.

And it cited a pro-life newspaper report that the Harper government has all but eliminated funding for Canada's member on the IPPF, the Canadian Federation for Sexual Health.

The release went on to list a series of anti-abortion comments from various Conservative MPs, dating as far back as 1990. Most of the quotes were unrelated to Canada's foreign aid policy.

On a related note, it completely disgusts me that the Canadian Press uses the words "pro-life" to describe an a publication or an MP. How fucking dare they. If they are anti-abortion, then say so.

Over and over, again and again, we see evidence of how these anti-woman fanatics have succeeded. They've turned the gaze of mainstream society - even those who imagine they are moderate or neutral - to see through the lens of their lies.

6 comments:

redsock said...

it completely disgusts me that the Canadian Press uses the words "pro-life" to describe an a publication or an MP

This is a great example -- the media (knowingly or absentmindedly) adopting the propogandist language of one side -- of how the issue gets formed and twisted in the minds of an average person who does not think about the issue all that much:

pro-choice vs pro-life
>
abortion vs life
>
death vs life

CanNurse said...

I also like to use "Anti-Choice". Seems pretty accurate!

Andrea said...

I wish the Anti-choice wording was used a lot more often because this sums it all up.
It was the last PM damn my brain has gone fuzzy with names.
ugh
He said my religious views and feelings have nothing to do with pro-choice vs pro-life. This is a democracy and in a democracy you have a choice.

Dharma Seeker said...

Going to school in Ontario that's all we ever heard. If speakers came to address a health class they were either "pro-life" or "pro-choice". "anti" never entered in to it. I'll be using "pro-choice" or "anti-choice" from now on.

Oemissions said...

CanNurse: great!
Will use that one.
Reminds me of: "Environmentalists say..." We never hear: "Non Environmentalists say..."

L-girl said...

Reminds me of: "Environmentalists say..." We never hear: "Non Environmentalists say..."

Yes we do. "Industry spokespeople say...", for example. A spokesperson for the environment vs a spokesperson for something that destroys the environment.

Or I don't understand your point?