In Stephen Harper’s Canada, this child could easily have been cut to shreds within his mother’s womb, or salted, or whatever barbaric method we use to kill our own sons and daughters.

In Stephen Harper’s Canada, it is easier for a little girl to have an abortion than it is for her to get prescription drugs.  Hard to believe, but true.  There are no repercussions to an abortionist, because there are no laws governing abortion.  Stephen Harper’s moral vacuum.

I was a conservative, but where does someone like me hang their vote when those who claim to hold higher moral values — forsake them,— the minute winning or losing at the polls becomes more important than standing for abiding truths.  “Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a disgrace to any people.”

Video on a ‘non-human’ – according to the cowardly conservatives…..

http://shine.yahoo.com/parenting/dad-films-premature-son-s-miraculous-first-year-185522631.html

……………and a response from a friend, that I think deserves serious thought,…………“Capital Punishment is Euthanasia for committing a heinous crime.But according to our Godless government, Capital Punishment is “playing God” so we can’t go there… really?

Abortion is Euthanasia of an unborn baby = Capital Punishment for having committed no crime.

 Capital punishment in reality is just post-birth abortion of a deserving individual, is it not?

 We are willing and poised at any time to euthanize innocent unborn babies, innocent old people, innocent sick people, innocent disabled people, innocent depressed people, innocent “burdens on society” people…

Why not those guilty of murdering and raping innocent people?

 Before we even consider discussing euthanasia for any of the innocents above mentioned, I want capital punishment reinstated, period.”

 

And here is…….
JOSEPH BREAN:  NATIONAL POST

WATERLOO, ONT. — The last time the University of Waterloo hosted a talk by Conservative MP Stephen Woodworth, who is on the cutting edge of Canada’s underground abortion debate, he was shouted down by a man dressed as a six-foot-tall pink vagina, known as Vulveta.

This time, things were different. The man in the genitalia — Ethan Jackson, a fourth-year women and gender studies and religion student at nearby Wilfrid Laurier University — is banned from the Waterloo campus, as was a fellow protester.

www.ncln.ca

http://www.ncln.caEthan Jackson, dressed as “Vulveta,” confronts MP Stephen Woodworth at the University of Waterloo in March 2013.

So Mr. Woodworth’s rescheduled talk went ahead Thursday night under heavy police protection, as officers patrolled empty hallways and medics sat at the ready outside a poky little second-floor classroom, half-filled with the school’s anti-abortion club.

Half a dozen demonstrators, one in a shirt declaring pride in her abortion, vainly offered pamphlets at a hallway table.

As Canada gears up for a historic reckoning of the laws that govern medical care at the end of life, it is instructive to witness the sorry state of discourse over the beginnings of life — a debate that alternates between a raucous bun fight and a somnolent mass, and answers micro-managed debate with performance art protest.

Even those permitted to hear the musings of the local backbencher — he represents nearby Kitchener Centre — on Canada’s awkward legal designation of fetuses as non-human until the moment of delivery were denied the right to ask questions out loud. Instead, they were made to write them down on slips of paper.

In a talk that was unusually frank for a sitting parliamentarian, Mr. Woodworth gave full voice to what critics call a stealth effort to recriminalize abortion, but which sounded more like a reflection on the philosophical basis of legal humanity. He said he is shocked so few Canadians seem to share his outrage at Section 223 of the Canadian Criminal Code.

In defining homicide as causing the death of a human being, that section says “a child becomes a human being within the meaning of this Act when it has completely proceeded, in a living state, from the body of its mother, whether or not it has breathed, it has an independent circulation, or the navel string is severed.”

Mr. Woodworth called this an “extremist view,” a “dishonest pretence” and “a relic of more barbarous times,” comparable to such historical wrongs as Canada’s refusal to recognize women as “persons,” or Australia’s past legal view of Aborigines, or the Nazi designation of Jews as sub-human. As such, he says Canada’s laws are in conflict with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

“That’s where the argument really hits the ground,” he said.

‘There are always reasons that tyranny can find to justify its position’

The MP tried to do something about it last year, through a private member’s bill that urged an inquiry into the origins of life as designated by Canadian law. It attracted the support of 93 MPs, including senior ministers, but failed because Parliament “didn’t even really know what it was about … they thought it was about abortion.”

Instead, he will soon introduce a motion urging Parliament to affirm “that every Canadian law must be interpreted in a manner which recognizes in law the equal worth and dignity of everyone who is in fact a human being.”

Odds are people will think that is about abortion too, which he finds frustrating.

“Why should we have a law that declares someone is not a human being when we know otherwise?” Mr. Woodworth said.

Curiously for a speaker at an anti-abortion gathering, he had kind words for Henry Mortgentaler, who once told Parliament there ought to be a “cutoff date for legal abortion,” which would recognize some unborn fetuses as human under the law.

He flirted with serious controversy only once, in mentioning the question of abortion after rape, which he did not dwell on, except to say, “You don’t solve it by pretending one is not a human being.”

Glenn Lowson photo for National Post

Glenn Lowson photo for National PostMP Stephen Woodworth will soon introduce a motion urging Parliament to affirm “that every Canadian law must be interpreted in a manner which recognizes in law the equal worth and dignity of everyone who is in fact a human being.”

The MP also used the example of soldiers, who are told they may kill the enemy, but not that the enemy is inhuman — quite the opposite, in fact, especially if they are captured alive.

“There are always reasons that tyranny can find to justify its position,” he said. Its supporters can marshall the “most terrible and strangest arguments.”

As evidence, he mentioned the fringe theory in bioethics that questions whether newborn infants are fully human despite not being self-aware, which could theoretically justify “after birth abortions.”

“The categories of victim are never closed to tyranny,” Mr. Woodworth said. “Firmly in the sights: newborn infants. Next? Who knows?”

He said abortion should be regarded as a conflict between the rights of a child and its mother, rather than a medical concern of the mother alone.

Mr. Jackson, the famous Vulveta, said this is precisely why he protested.

Mr. Woodworth “is trying to change legislation to say that, from the point of conception to the point of birth, that the fetus has full human rights,” he said.

“That’s wrong, that’s a huge fall backwards for women’s rights and reproductive justice.”

National Post

Advertisements