conservatives

Abortion and time travel

06/03/2008 by Debra

Those who like to think of themselves as “pro-life”, “pro-family”, “pro-values” are in fact far from it. The governments and policies these people support has done more to hurt families than perhaps any government before it. Save for the injustices done to the native Canadians and the internment of the Japanese families during the war.

These ‘not your father’s Conservatives’, are an unhealthy blend of blinkered, literalist religion and unshackled corporatism. In no way should they be confused with the likes of Bill Davis.

These anti choicers often claim they want a return to the 50’s and 60’s as if there was no sex then, no out of wedlock children, no rape, and that corporate profit was valued above all.

Being the product of a 1950’s out of wedlock sexual experience I can testify that even then teenages felt the urge to merge. The sad thing was that so many were forced into giving their babies away or giving them to family to raise. Which impacted not only thier lives but the lives of the children involved.

Rape was as common then as now, it was just blamed on the woman. Heh, I guess that hasn’t really changed much.

Corporations, however, did pull their own weight, paid their taxes like good citizens and in fact carried a much heavier tax load than did the average hard working Canadian, as is appropriate. Interestingly, they managed to do all that and still provide plentiful and usually decent paying jobs.

The upside of this besides the job availability was that schools, health care and other social programs were being properly funded and there was increasing recognition that taking care of “the least of these my brethren” was not only a proper Christian thing to do, but benefited society in general.

I remember schools being open during the summer months with arts & crafts, sports, movies, and other programs being run by university Recreation students. These provided stay at home moms with a break and kids with something to do. These programs were free of charge, drop-in and definitely “family friendly”. I very much doubt the so-called pro-family sorts would support their tax dollars going to it however. Other free programs that provided entertainment for children were swimming pools, ice rinks, and parks provided programs and places to play ball.

Health care funding came into being and was amply supported by the corporate tax base. Now that that base has been so throughly eroded health care appears to be an undue burden when in fact it is the change of tax base that is the unfair burden.

It had been recognized that providing at least a semi decent living for families out of work, single mothers and the children associated with these families was a good thing. Then the CONservatives came along and othered the poor. Now there are Canadian children going to school without boots or properly warm coats, going to bed without dinner and poverty related businesses like pawn shops, buy & sells and pay day loans are booming. Diseases like TB once thought to be under control are flourishing again as are other poverty related illnesses.

Anti-choicers in the U.S. and Canada are working ‘incrementally’ towards making abortion unconstitutional. Well lets look at that in practice.

Section 12 of the Philippine constitution reads;

The State recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall protect and strengthen the family as a basic autonomous social institution. It shall equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from conception. The natural and primary right and duty of parents in the rearing of the youth for civic efficiency and the development of moral character shall receive the support of the Government.

oooh a fetus fetishers wet dream come true.

Or maybe not so much. Let’s look at how this works in practice.

Official estimates put annual abortions at 400,000 to 500,000, and rising. The World Health Organization estimate puts the figure at nearly 800,000, one of the highest rates of unsafe abortions in Asia.
Seventy percent of unwanted pregnancies in the Philippines end in abortion said Jean-Marc Olivé, the country representative of the World Health Organization. One of four pregnancies in the Philippines end in abortion, according to Pro-Life Philippines, an anti-abortion group.
According to the Department of Health, nearly 100,000 women who have unsafe abortions every year end up in the hospital.
The Philippines, with its high population growth rate (2.6 percent) and low rate of contraceptive use (an estimated 35 percent) also has an increasing number of teenage pregnancies. As many as 17 percent of all unsafe abortions are done on teenage or young mothers, according to the Department of Health.

Use of contraceptives is actively discouraged

Women in the Philippines are trapped in an unbearable dilemma: the Catholic Church, whose influence over the country is strong, prohibits all forms of contraception, but extreme poverty prohibits large families. As a result, the Philippines has a very high abortion rate: 20-30 out of every 1,000 women of childbearing age have had an abortion, despite its illegal status. Filipino women, in an effort to keep their abortions secret, use crude methods, such as inserting sharp objects into the uterus or drinking toxic chemicals. The problem is so severe that illegal abortion is now the fourth leading cause of death among Filipino women.

Well now doesn’t that sound terrific? And I mean that as in the Latin terrificus : terr?re, to frighten + -ficus, -fic

Before you decide that bills like C-484, and campaigns like The Pill Kills, are of no consequence remember the stats above. Making abortion illegal, making contraceptives illegal does not stop the reality of the need for abortion. Indeed all it does is make criminals out of women exercising control over their bodies and of mothers trying to ensure there is enough for their already born children. From Reuters, ” Most women who have abortions in the Philippines are married, Roman Catholic and mothers already with at least three children. The majority terminate their pregnancy because they cannot afford another child.”

Those who truly believe in families, in values and indeed in a glorious being, will recognize the value in a political system which does not seek to make women’s reproductive capacities state infrastructure.

How Harper celebrated Women’s History Month

10/29/2007 by Debra

As we near the end of Women’s History Month it is time to pause and reflect on the way our ignoble PM celebrated with us.

Red Jenny tells us of a new bill

The Harper government yesterday introduced legislation requiring all voters – including veiled Muslim women – to show their faces before being allowed to cast ballots in federal elections.

A Creative Revolution informs us of his support for women in the north

The Status of Women cuts that the UnReal women of Canada so lauded and cheered about like a bunch of mindless maroons, the ones that killed NAWL funding, have had an even harsher effect in the real great white north.
Women in the Yukon are 2.9 times more likely to experience sexual abuse, or be killed by a spouse than women in other parts of Canada. The Organizations that seek to help them are being forced to scramble for alternate funds through bake sales and garage sales.

Mere days before WHM we saw the passing of National Association of Women and the Law

Close Harper friend and advisor Tom Flanagan speaks;

Flanagan calls funding cuts to Status of Women Canada and the elimination of the Court Challenges Program a “nice step,” asserting without equivocation that Conservatives will “defund” all equality-seeking groups – with feminists at the top of the list. He goes further, clarifying that Conservatives also plan to choke-off these groups’ supposedly privileged access to government by, for example, denying “meetings with ministers.” But for strategic reasons, Flanagan notes, this will all happen incrementally. To avoid the perception of mean-spirited retribution, he says, “incrementalism is the way to go.”

Avoid the perception yet not the reality.

And the PM Statement section? Still reads, “forthcoming”.

Of course Harper is proving that actions do speak louder than words.

That’s ok Stevie we’re not waiting for your call…we’re just not that into you.

Please Try to Remember the First of Octember

10/16/2007 by Debra

If you are, or were, a Dr. Suess fan you may remember this book. Written about the glorious things you could do on the First of Octember such as stay up all night to drink “66 six packs of Doodle Delight.”

October is Women’s History month. A current look at the SWC site shows this statement from our Prime Minister;

“forthcoming”

Mid way through October Canada’s New Government™ has yet to issue a statement. Perhaps the script from Gwen was delayed….indefinitely?

One imagines that Harper et al would far rather Women’s History month, and indeed all matters pertaining to women’s equality, be relegated to the First of Octember.

Think of the glorious things he could do like ignore the child care issue, roll back programs that most especially help women, place tax cuts above health care, child poverty, employment issues….mmm seems he is already doing that.

Perhaps our ignoble PM lives in the land of Octember.

October 18th is Person’s Day. This is a day to commemorate the Person’s Case.

On October 18, 1929, the five Lords of the Judicial Committee came to the unanimous conclusion that “the word ‘persons’ in Section 24 includes both the male and female sex.…” According to them, the exclusion of women from public office was “a relic of days more barbarous than ours.

It is a sad and sobering thought that there are those who would joyously lead us back to those “barbaric” times. Those who see women not as persons in their own right but simply as wombs from which issue the cannon fodder needed to perpetuate war. War against other countries and war against the marginalized.

As we reflect upon Women’s History let us not forget the struggles that we are free not to face. The struggle for education, for our own name, for our own property, to not be included as property, the right to be paid a decent wage, to fight against sexual impropriety in the workplace, the right to control our reproduction, the right to say no in marriage and so much more.

Our fight to keep our rights, to move forward in our struggle, to ensure our daughters’ never have to fight to be recognized as persons in their own right, is one that must not be relegated to the First of Octember.

( cross posted @ Rose’s Place )

Get it done

06/22/2007 by Debra

“We can get it done,” Brownback told a crowd of about 100 people, according to the Des Moines Register.
“We’re one justice away, and if we lose this we’re going to be two or three judges away from overturning this thing that is wrong,” he said.

This is the second time that Brownback has said he would like to nominate the next Supreme Court justice who could provide the fifth vote to overturn Roe v. Wade.

Canada’s New Government™ (retch) Getting things done for all of us

Nascar Get er done

Coincidence?

Mothers

05/09/2007 by Debra

An interesting article at Women’s Enews on mothering and the value placed on it. While much lip service is given to the undertaking, little is done to actually support those choosing to have children.

(WOMENSENEWS)–The news media loves stories about highly educated mothers opting out of rewarding careers to stay at home with their young children.
Anecdotal evidence unsupported by serious research is also constantly drumming home the idea that women consider themselves the best providers of child care. For example, a 2006 Salary.com survey of what mothers do “on the job” leads with the headline “Dream Job: Stay at Home Mom.” Although the survey claims that equal numbers of working and stay-at-home mothers participated, quotes from the happy, at-home mothers dominate the report.
For instance, working mothers are “horrified” at the thought of hiring strangers to care for their children, they believe that mother’s care is “priceless” and that motherhood is the “greatest job in the world.” It’s easy to stay on message: Women must choose between work and family.
But the opposite message is sent to low-income mothers.
The recent debate over the welfare-to-work provisions of Temporary Assistance to Needy Families–or welfare–captures this difference. Congress did not debate the best means to provide even minimally adequate day care to the children of single parents. Instead they wondered whether or not the required hours of paid work should be increased!
Why does popular sentiment portray some mothers as virtuous when they drop out of the labor force to care for their families, while others are responsible only if they work for pay outside the home?

With Mothers Day coming up and the usual platitudes running rampant trying to get you to spend spend spend to show mom how much you love her, and with the forced pregnancy folks all creamed up about Bushie and company and their anti choice stance, I thought it might be interesting to see just how much mothers are valued once those sacred womb contents are born. [Read more…] about Mothers

Rights for the Rich only

04/07/2007 by Debra

The Star has an article on the Charter today,

A quarter-century later, the Charter is at a crossroads. While there may be much to celebrate, the process of using it to establish rights is time-consuming and expensive, almost entirely dependent on government subsidies and the benevolence of lawyers to bankroll cases, sometimes costing millions of dollars.
Restrictions on legal aid and a decision last fall by the Conservative government to kill the Court Challenges Program, which helped fund individuals and citizen groups fighting for constitutional protections, have made the Charter more inaccessible than ever.
Today, many experts are pessimistic about its future as a tool in battling for equality and fending off unwarranted government intrusions into people’s lives. Like fine champagne, the Charter is in danger of becoming a luxury many never taste.

Interesting quotes from a conservative on rights for the average Canadian.

Rainer Knopff, a political scientist at the University of Calgary, said the program was “a biased boondoggle that had gone well past its `best before’ date.”

The program only funded groups on “one side” of the political spectrum while “socially conservative groups never got any money. Not a penny, as far as I know,” said Knopff.
He also echoed then-Treasury Board president John Baird’s suggestion, made in defending the decision to kill the program, that it made no sense for Ottawa to spend public money helping groups challenge its own legislation.
“I don’t want to pay for surrogate litigants,” said Knopff, arguing public interest groups should raise their own money for Charter cases. “If they can’t raise the money – tough.”

Apparently conservatives feel rights are for those that can afford them. Not that this is surprising, however, it is nice to have it so neatly laid out.

One can only hope that during an election campaign these words along with those of Harper saying that ordinary Canadians aren’t protesting complete with scenes of farmers and seniors and youth out protesting, find major play in party ads.